2016 Election - Trump: How Did Trump Really Win the Presidency?

TIDE-HSV said:

I don't think the real issue is black or white, Saddam in or out. (I also suspected Bush's motives, which suspicions were, IMO, confirmed with the "Daddy" remark.) What I feared most was destabilization and every single one of my fears have come true. the Middle East seems to need "strong men," and it's Quixotic to try to rid the world of them as our holy mission. You know, it would be nice if we could have a decent, nuanced, discussion around here occasionally, with out all of this stupid trying to divide everything into "is this on the right or on the left," which, IMO, tends to interfere with independent thinking. Sigh, I know, perfect world and all that...

Click to expand...

ValuJet said:

I would be glad to contribute to a Saddam Good or Bad? thread and we would probably agree that he was bad.

Click to expand...

TIDE-HSV said:

You know, it would be nice if we could have a decent, nuanced, discussion around here occasionally, with out all of this stupid trying to divide everything into "is this on the right or on the left," which, IMO, tends to interfere with independent thinking. Sigh, I know, perfect world and all that...

Click to expand...

ValuJet said:

I agree. Unfortunately threads like this one, as you will notice if you look at all the anti-Trump comments, bring out the passions in people. I don't think there would be any denying that. And yes I, too, recall Bush 43 referencing that Saddam was a man who threatened to kill Daddy when he was scheduling a trip to visit Kuwait, post Desert Storm. I thought that was a lame excuse for committing us into a military misadventure. But once we were there, and Saddam was out, we didn't need to cut and run. We see what happened.

Again regarding Saddam, we've gone from a brutal, callous dictator to an evil outfit that burns people alive and drowns Christians (and non compliant Muslims) in cages. My comment was in the context of how bad was Saddam? Compared to what's in Iraq now. Understand it's an uncomfortable position to be in to try to make sense of it and post an opinion that's going to prove to one day be correct, as Bernie Sanders constantly reminded Democrat voters in the debates.

This thread is now closing in on 3700 posts. Every time Trump says or tweets something that can be remotely regarded as questionable, this thread adds another 100-200 posts. So I guess if one spends enough time here they can see plenty of left and right leaning opinions.

I would be glad to contribute to a Saddam Good or Bad? thread and we would probably agree that he was bad.

Click to expand...

KentuckianaBFan said:

Saddam or ISIS? Hillary or Trump? Sometimes we just don't have much or a choice...:conf2:

Click to expand...

81usaf92 said:

If you are giving me the choice of sadaam or Isis, then I'm choosing sadaam every day of the week and twice on Sunday. There is evil and then there is necessary evil. Sadaam was the later. The most comparable person to sadaam in history was joesip Tito. The Balkans hasn't been the same since his death. That's the problem when you have a small area filled with a multitude of different types of people in a highly radicalized place in the world. While the concept of a totalitarian government is foreign to us, it may be the only solution to places like Iraq.

Click to expand...

KentuckianaBFan said:

Saddam or ISIS? Hillary or Trump? Sometimes we just don't have much or a choice...:conf2:

Click to expand...

KentuckianaBFan said:

I don'y disagree with your choice, but not quite so cut and dry for me--Saddam did use chemical weapons on "his" own people...ISIS has done worse. The thing that frustrates Westerners "why can't they all just get along?"...

Click to expand...

TIDE-HSV said:

I agree with most of that. However, for the reasons I stated about fearing the domino effect - which has happened - I think it would have been a better world, if Saddam had remained and we had continued to clip his wings progressively. Unless we had tried to assume the role of the British following the Ottoman collapse and committed ourselves to the 1K annual casualties they suffered, staying on vs. "cutting and running" was not a real option, just imaginary and good for 20-20 hindsight speculation. As for Trump and the number of posts, the man is a living lightning rod and there's no getting around that. We are the tiniest part of the commentary on him here. But, I agree, I'm sick to death of hearing about him and his ceaseless foot-shooting. Helluva election...

Click to expand...

81usaf92 said:

If you are giving me the choice of sadaam or Isis, then I'm choosing sadaam every day of the week and twice on Sunday. There is evil and then there is necessary evil. Sadaam was the later. The most comparable person to sadaam in history was joesip Tito. The Balkans hasn't been the same since his death. That's the problem when you have a small area filled with a multitude of different types of people in a highly radicalized place in the world. While the concept of a totalitarian government is foreign to us, it may be the only solution to places like Iraq.

Click to expand...

81usaf92 said:

The biggest consequences from us overthrowing sadaam has been the rise of Isis, extreme destabilization in the region, and strengthening the Persians. You can list all the atrocities sadaam did, but I just don't see where taking him out made the world any safer, but I can clearly see where it made the world more dangerous.

Maybe I should put it this way... If assaad is overthrown tomorrow, do you have more faith that the "geniuses" we are backing can hold and stabilize the country, or do you think it's going to be another Isis state that is going to blow up in our face because we believe that democracy works everywhere?

Click to expand...

Displaced Bama Fan said:

Don't forget we helped "overthrow" Mubarak and Qaddafi too. Fortunately, the Egyptian military is a little more secular and quickly restored some sanity. Reagan neutralized Qaddafi in the 80s and he was playing nice. But, Qaddafi had accumulated a bunch of gold and wanted to form an African backed gold currency. We all know that's not going to happen unless Lord Rothchild gives his seal of approval...so, bye, bye Qaddafi.

Click to expand...

Tide1986 said:

Piece by Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law:

http://observer.com/2016/07/jared-kushner-the-donald-trump-i-know/

Click to expand...

My father-in-law is not an anti-Semite.

Click to expand...

81usaf92 said:

Well you also had Weinberger advising Reagan in things. Weinberger believed that we should have a vital reason,we should have a specific objective , and it shouldnt be a prolonged conflict if we are going to have a war. In otherwords, he and Reagan didn't believe in a prolonged war with Libya.

I have to give it to HW as well with desert storm, Panama, and his involvement with Somalia. He really followed the Reagan style of conducting war, and they were mostly effective campaigns.

The other 3 bozos have either got us in conflicts we shouldn't been in, under supplied the military because they underestimated the enemy , or believed democracy works in every situation so we should aid any conflict against a dictator.

Click to expand...

Displaced Bama Fan said:

Son-in-law is Jewish. Daughter-in-law is Jewish. Upper level management in Trump, Inc. is Jewish. No, I don't think he's anti-Semite. I think he's the Republican version of Joe Biden and just doesn't know when to shut up.

Click to expand...