1 minute ago, ilross2003 said:

What were his most glaring issues?   

 

He was a neofascist conman who spent four years ****ting all over the Constitution and then tried to violently install a dictatorship.

 

 

2 minutes ago, ilross2003 said:

Which positives did he have?   

0

 

2 minutes ago, ilross2003 said:

I see that Trump is not the most liked person here. I certainly do not have enough knowledge about his presidency, except about his Israeli Policies. I haven't read enough about it to form my own opinion. I'd be very interested to learn about his presidency from the perspective of the US citizens. What were his most glaring issues? Which positives did he have?   

Oh god.  What did you do!?!?

 

Seriously just look around CVON.  It'll take about 30 seconds to figure it out.

1 minute ago, rambo said:

Oh god.  What did you do!?!?

 

Seriously just look around CVON.  It'll take about 30 seconds to figure it out.

 

Yeah, I don't want to derail this thread. I'll leave it at that, lol.

7 hours ago, ilross2003 said:

I see that Trump is not the most liked person here. I certainly do not have enough knowledge about his presidency, except about his Israeli Policies. I haven't read enough about it to form my own opinion. I'd be very interested to learn about his presidency from the perspective of the US citizens. What were his most glaring issues? Which positives did he have?   

You've come to the right place and you're going to get a lot of takers on this question.

I'd say his most glaring issue is a very broad one.  He's mentally ill.  To my knowledge, we're never had a President this deep into mental illness.  He couldn't perform the basic functions of a decent, law abiding human being, much less a strong leader that's qualified to set the policy agenda for the most powerful country in the world.  There's a million issues that stem from that (from extreme divisiveness that he forced on the people to breaking the decorum/social structure that kept America great to specific policies that he neither understood nor had the capability of properly implementing) but everything pretty much goes back the core issue that he's mentally ill.  It was an experiment that you have to seriously hope we never try again.

Positives?  Um...he was unintentionally hilarious.  The fact that he started a fascist overthrow of the government, told his people he'd participate in it and then went home and watched TV is still one of the funniest things I've ever seen.  That's all I've got.

20 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

You went after my credibility, so it is relevant to bring up your position on that topic, since it shows where your biases lie here.

these words mean nothing. try again

Hamas Propaganda on full effect.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/facebook-shuts-down-pro-israel-232558682.html

Facebook shuts down pro-Israel page after it was reportedly targeted by hate speech campaign

Brittany De Lea

Wed, May 19, 2021, 7:25 PM

 

 

Social media giant Facebook took down a pro-Israel page last week after it was allegedly targeted by radical Islamists amid ongoing unrest in the Gaza Strip.

 

Brittany De Lea

Wed, May 19, 2021, 7:25 PM

 

 

Social media giant Facebook took down a pro-Israel page last week after it was allegedly targeted by radical Islamists amid ongoing unrest in the Gaza Strip.

The Jerusalem Prayer Team (JPT) page, which has tens of millions of followers, was reportedly shut down on Friday after it was flooded with comments from people who allegedly wanted it taken offline.

The page’s founder, Michael Evans, told The Christian Broadcasting Network that there was an "organized attempt" by radical Islamists to target the page. Evans then said the people, who posted over 1 million comments on the site, contacted Facebook to say they had never written on the site.

A separate news outlet reported that Evans said some of the content posted was extremely anti-Semitic, including photos of Hitler.

"That was a complete scam and fraud," Evans told CBN. "It was a very clever, deceptive plan by Islamic radicals."

18 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

these words mean nothing. try again

Anyone who acts as an apologist for a neofascist uprising shows clearly which side of the aisle they're on, and on more than one occasion, you've acquitted yourself here as a warmonger and violence glorifier.

3 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

Anyone who acts as an apologist for a neofascist uprising shows clearly which side of the aisle they're on, and on more than one occasion, you've acquitted yourself here as a warmonger and violence glorifier.

Take Trump crap somewhere else. 

thats the strawman - i did no such thing. dont be foolish enough to let wgb do your thinking

in real time i was not watching and did ask if what we were seeing was violence or not. it became clear not long after exactly what happened and i've said they should all get the book thrown at them

so the strawman is your willful mischaracterization of my position so you can dismiss an opposing view. its a simpletons approach.

4 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

in real time i was not watching and did ask if what we were seeing was violence or not. it became clear not long after exactly what happened and i've said they should all get the book thrown at them.

 

Fair enough. You do seem to like violence, though. We obviously see things very differently, but we could do without the petty personal attacks.

Great article>

Op-Ed: How the world could help end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — and prevent future clashes

Once again, Israel and Hamas are engaged in an intensive and deadly exchange of rockets and bombings. This latest conflict, with all its pain, highlights several deeper realities.

First, the Palestinian issue can be neither dismissed nor denied. Some in Israel may have believed that the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and two Arab states, meant they could ignore the Palestinians and absorb the territories. But this week tells a different story — one that has implications not only for what is happening outside Israel but also internally for its social fabric.

Israel, of course, cannot solve the conflict on its own. Palestinians must also be willing to compromise, and that is something they continue to resist. But Israel must be open to new approaches that signal recognition of Palestinian, and not just Israeli, needs.

Second, Jerusalem remains the one issue that ignites passions and conflict, especially when religious sites are affected or Palestinian presence is threatened.

 

That is what set off the latest fighting between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants — the convergence of a pending decision by the Israeli Supreme Court that would evict several Palestinian families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood and clashes that touched Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque, the third-holiest site in Islam.

In both instances — the narrow legal interpretation of who owns the land and the police response to Palestinian rock-throwing near the mosque — the Israelis may have felt their response was justified. But the issue so often in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not whether you are right but whether you are wise. And it was surely not wise for Israeli police to be firing into the Al Aqsa Mosque.

Third, Hamas is a threat to the future of Palestinians and any eventual hope for peace. Hamas is about rejection, not coexistence. True to form, its leaders were quick to try to claim the mantel of defense of Jerusalem and leadership of the Palestinian movement by launching rockets at Jerusalem. Its leaders knew this would change nothing in Jerusalem but would play on Palestinian anger even as it was sure to provoke a tough Israeli response.

That Palestinians in Jerusalem could be killed by Hamas rockets, and that Palestinians in Gaza were sure to die from the Israeli responses, mattered not in the least to Hamas leaders. They embed themselves underground and in tunnels they reserve for their weapons and fighters but not their public. The tens of thousands of rockets and the tunnels they have built consume steel, metal, electrical wiring, cement — all of which could be used for construction in impoverished Gaza, but they are not because that is not Hamas’ concern.

When the current battle is over, Gaza will be even more devastated, with overwhelming need for reconstruction, but Hamas’ first priority (with Iranian support) will be rebuilding its military arsenal so it can again attack Israeli cities.

Any future policy must ensure that Hamas cannot rebuild its arsenal, for sooner or later it will use it.

So what must be done now?

Start by relying on Egypt once again to mediate a cease-fire. Hamas is probably ready to end this latest round of fighting, knowing that electricity and fuel in Gaza are now in short supply and its longer-range rockets will sooner or later be exhausted.

Similarly, while Israel wants to reestablish deterrence, its military recognizes that it has succeeded in destroying much of Hamas’ rocket-producing capabilities and its network of tunnels. Moreover, Israeli leaders know they are approaching diminishing returns, given the limited payoffs of additional damage to Hamas capabilities and the price Israel pays internationally for the numbers of Palestinians being killed in Gaza.

Next, shine a spotlight on Hamas’ rockets. Do so by mobilizing a credible international plan for reconstruction, with specific large-scale infrastructure and housing plans, but conditioned on a verifiable withdrawal of all remaining rockets and their production capacity. Let Hamas explain before the international community and Palestinians why its rockets are more important than the people of Gaza.

And then, after calm has been restored, use the normalization process of Arab state outreach to Israel to break the stalemate between Israelis and Palestinians. The United Arab Emirates offered a model when it made full normalization with Israel conditional on Israel not annexing the territory in the West Bank allotted to it in President Trump’s 2020 peace plan — which would have permitted Israel to annex roughly 30% of the West Bank. The Biden administration should take the Emirates' model and flexibly apply it.

For example, the White House should go discreetly to the Saudis and Israelis and propose a menu of normalizing options and responses: Saudi Arabia opens a commercial trade office in Tel Aviv and Israel stops settlement building to the east of the security barrier or on 92% of the West Bank. This would not produce two states but would preserve it as an option — and its possibility would be used to require and broker a parallel move toward Israel by the Palestinian Authority.

None of this will happen by itself. One thing we know: Returning to the state of affairs that existed before the latest outbreak is not the answer, unless, of course, we want the cycle to repeat at ever-heightening costs.

Dennis Ross served in senior national security positions in the Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Obama administrations. He is counselor at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

11 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Fair enough. You do seem to like violence, though. We obviously see things very differently, but we could do without the petty personal attacks.

not so much that i like it. i  just think conflict is part of the normal relam of human behavior

2 hours ago, VanHammersly said:

Hamas has no advantages in this situation, except their relative anonymity.  They're vastly outgunned in every sense of the word.  Nothing anyone says changes that.

But I could care less either way.  Back Israel, give them the green light to steamroll the region, back Hamas, cut off aid to Israel, either way, doesn't matter to me.  As long as we keep boots out of there, I'm fine with it.

This is basically where I'm at. If Israel needs to defend themselves, then go for it. Take some aid while you're at it. Just don't let all that dickswinging escalate into a full out war that inevitably drags several other nations into the conflict.

35 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

thats the strawman - i did no such thing. dont be foolish enough to let wgb do your thinking

in real time i was not watching and did ask if what we were seeing was violence or not. it became clear not long after exactly what happened and i've said they should all get the book thrown at them

so the strawman is your willful mischaracterization of my position so you can dismiss an opposing view. its a simpletons approach.

  You're such a bad liar

13 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Hamas is a threat to the future of Palestinians and any eventual hope for peace. Hamas is about rejection, not coexistence.

Absolutely. Hamas is interested to keep the Palestinian population poor and hungry, making them much easier to manipulate. That's why instead of investing in education, infrastructure, medicine and so on, they prefer to invest in the rockets and "Metro". If they vote for Hamas again - I won't know what to say. But, it very well may be that it doesn't really matter anymore what they vote, Hamas will twist the results somehow... 

15 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

This is basically where I'm at. If Israel needs to defend themselves, then go for it. Take some aid while you're at it. Just don't let all that dickswinging escalate into a full out war that inevitably drags several other nations into the conflict.

Yep.  I mean, in theory we could go in and try some sort of resolution, like once again proposing a two state solution that Hamas will reject, but what's the point.  It'll degrade soon after.  So, why bother?  I'll tell you this, if I were an Israeli, I'd get the hell out of dodge and head west.  It'll never end well for them, unfortunately.  Even if they went full-scale ethnic cleansing, it would eventually backfire. There's just no way for them to ever live in peace in that region, short of some unforeseen Islamic reformation.  And no amount of might from them will ever change that.

6 minutes ago, ilross2003 said:

Absolutely. Hamas is interested to keep the Palestinian population poor and hungry, making them much easier to manipulate. That's why instead of investing in education, infrastructure, medicine and so on, they prefer to invest in the rockets and "Metro". If they vote for Hamas again - I won't know what to say. But, it very well may be that it doesn't really matter anymore what they vote, Hamas will twist the results somehow... 

Well according to a report I posted the other day, Palestine was supposed to hold an election this year and Hamas was going to gain even more political support. 

6 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Yep.  I mean, in theory we could go in and try some sort of resolution, like once again proposing a two state solution that Hamas will reject, but what's the point.  It'll degrade soon after.  So, what bother?  I'll tell you this, if I were an Israeli, I'd get the hell out of dodge and head west.  It'll never end well for them, unfortunately.  Even if they went full-scale ethnic cleansing, it would eventually backfire. There's just no way for them to ever live in peace in that region, short of some unforeseen Islamic reformation.  And no amount of might from them will ever change that.

game it out. they take over Gaza and push Hamas out. what happens next?

i don't see any sovereign state taking the risk to stick up for Hamas. not worth it. Would it just move the location of Hamas terrorism? perhaps. even if they managed the impossible task of killing every one of them, would we expect another group to rise up and replace them? maybe. 

at least in that scenario, they could unify the land and establish some type of national border. 

4 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Well according to a report I posted the other day, Palestine was supposed to hold an election this year and Hamas was going to gain even more political support. 

tells you its going the wrong way. diplomacy has failed bc one party has no interest in it.

 

Just now, ToastJenkins said:

game it out. they take over Gaza and push Hamas out. what happens next?

i don't see any sovereign state taking the risk to stick up for Hamas. not worth it. Would it just move the location of Hamas terrorism? perhaps. even if they managed the impossible task of killing every one of them, would we expect another group to rise up and replace them? maybe. 

at least in that scenario, they could unify the land and establish some type of national border. 

It's pretty hard to completely game out.  Could full on ethnic cleansing force Iran's hand and lead to total war?  Sure, it absolutely could.  It's one thing to placate your hardliners with simply providing weapons and support when you have a presence, but once you don't?  All bets are off.  Or, they could back down and the end result is a steady stream of terrorism from within.  It's hard to say, but considering where they are, a peaceful Israel will never exist.  Hell, it's basically never existed anyway.  The areas just holds too much significance for too many disparate people for it to ever settle into a peaceful existence.

11 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Well according to a report I posted the other day, Palestine was supposed to hold an election this year and Hamas was going to gain even more political support. 

Yep, that's right. I'm having a hard time to understand that. They just have to look at the Palestinians in the West Bank (which is not ruled by Hamas) that live much better than Gaza population. 

@ilross2003 Is it weird to you that the support Israel has from American Evangelicals is almost exclusively based on their desire for the Second Coming where all Jewish people will either be killed or converted?  Seems like a very weird, morbid partnership.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

It's pretty hard to completely game out.  Could full on ethnic cleansing force Iran's hand and lead to total war?  Sure, it absolutely could.  It's one thing to placate your hardliners with simply providing weapons and support when you have a presence, but once you don't?  All bets are off.  Or, they could back down and the end result is a steady stream of terrorism from within.  It's hard to say, but considering where they are, a peaceful Israel will never exist.  Hell, it's basically never existed anyway.  The areas just holds too much significance for too many disparate people for it to ever settle into a peaceful existence.

Iran isnt stupid enough to martyr themselves for the sake of Hamas. that's silly. They know it would draw the US and others in, basically turning their capital into rubble, Syria style.

would give them new propaganda that would last for generations for sure. not sure they need new material, but it wouldnt hurt. thats what they would use it for.

3 minutes ago, ilross2003 said:

Yep, that's right. I'm having a hard time to understand that. They just have to look at the Palestinians in the West Bank (which is not ruled by Hamas) and live much better than Gaza population. 

i think its a combination of Hamas' propaganda and the fear that Hamas would kill them if they voted against them.

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

@ilross2003 Is it weird to you that the support Israel has from American Evangelicals is almost exclusively based on their desire for the Second Coming where all Jewish people will either be killed or converted?  Seems like a very weird, morbid partnership.

you need to stop pretending you understand why people think what they do

8 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Iran isnt stupid enough to martyr themselves for the sake of Hamas. that's silly. They know it would draw the US and others in, basically turning their capital into rubble, Syria style.

would give them new propaganda that would last for generations for sure. not sure they need new material, but it wouldnt hurt. thats what they would use it for.

 

6 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

i think its a combination of Hamas' propaganda and the fear that Hamas would kill them if they voted against them.

you need to stop pretending you understand why people think what they do

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

@ilross2003 Is it weird to you that the support Israel has from American Evangelicals is almost exclusively based on their desire for the Second Coming where all Jewish people will either be killed or converted?  Seems like a very weird, morbid partnership.

It is weird, I agree. I suppose that in our case we seek for any kind of support. I think those guys are extremely loyal, due to their strong religious commitment (until the Second Coming at least). After the Second Coming though... But I'll take my chances 🙂