Because you know, there could actually be some bad guys in that caravan.Because you know all those young mothers carrying toddlers are some mean, nasty violent folk...[emoji57]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because you know, there could actually be some bad guys in that caravan.Because you know all those young mothers carrying toddlers are some mean, nasty violent folk...[emoji57]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Gunning down women and toddlers is definitely worth it to stop a couple of hypothetical bad dudes.Because you know, there could actually be some bad guys in that caravan.
Cowards always mix women and children. Do you really think our troops would gun down women and children? Please...If ordered, I would guarantee you our troops would stand down from that aspect. The men, well, that's a different animal.Gunning down women and toddlers is definitely worth it to stop a couple of hypothetical bad dudes.
Obviously different scenarios but our troops have gunned down women and children before.Cowards always mix women and children. Do you really think our troops would gun down women and children? Please...If ordered, I would guarantee you our troops would stand down from that aspect. The men, well, that's a different animal.
From a week ago:Obviously different scenarios but our troops have gunned down women and children before.
In a two-day preliminary hearing at Naval Base San Diego that concluded Thursday, prosecutors presented accounts from several other SEALs in Chief Gallagher’s platoon describing his behavior as reckless and bloodthirsty. They said he fired into civilian crowds, gunned down a girl walking along a riverbank and an old man carrying a water jug, and threatened to kill fellow SEALs if they reported his actions.
Some platoon members were so distraught by the chief’s actions, investigators said, that they tampered with his sniper rifle to make it less accurate, and fired warning shots to scare away civilians before the chief had a chance to shoot them.
why do you hate americaObviously different scenarios but our troops have gunned down women and children before.
Kent State comes to mindObviously different scenarios but our troops have gunned down women and children before.
That shouldn’t be in Blue fontwhy do you hate america
i'm trying to be civil, with it being thanksgiving and all.That shouldn’t be in Blue font
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very different scenarios.Obviously different scenarios but our troops have gunned down women and children before.
White supremacists? Geezus, margi & joey. Do you know for a fact that Nazis or Klan are lining the border chomping at the bit to shoot them?I just don't believe our troops will fire on innocent civilians. My concern is that there may likely be armed white supremacists nearby who could open fire into the caravan.
Is it wrong to have troops defending your border? I'm asking for a friend.This begs the whole question: why were “troops” sent there in the first place? To string barbed wire?
The way these Trump supporters rationalize his behavior will (or should) go down in history as some of the most idiotic and, at its core, unpatriotic pablum ever spewed by such a large (definitely not the majority) segment of our population.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
However your post claimed essentially they would never do it.Very different scenarios.
depending on your definition of "troops", there is a law that say yes, it is. some dude told me that.Is it wrong to have troops defending your border? I'm asking for a friend.
Unless your border neighbor is your enemy; I’d say Mexico is an ally, so having troops at the border would be admitting they’re not really any ally.depending on your definition of "troops", there is a law that say yes, it is. some dude told me that.