Supertramp Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 That man is a walking and talking security risk for the US. Neither he nor his administration are qualified to run a country... Just look at how members of his team have been spilling state secrets/using private emails for government-related communication. With that being said, Hilary wouldn't have been a much better electoral option, but it would have been the lesser evil. Trump is way too discriminatory in his words and his actions and I think it's just a matter of time before he ****** off someone he shouldn't have. To add on top of that, he is quite hypocritical in his actions against the immigrants, given the fact that his wife comes from eastern Europe. There are many other disgusting things about him, such as when he hinted that he would have s*x with his own daughter if he wasn't her father. My bet is that he'd either die from something like a stress-induced heart attack, or he'll simply get assassinated. I'm willing to bet a quid on that. Any takers? Ooooh a whole quid. I'll bet that he gets re-elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_J Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 Ooooh a whole quid. I'll bet that he gets re-elected. You're on. Would you mind getting a quid soaked in tears, though, because I'd be really sad if you turn out to be a clairvoyant or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Smith Posted April 7, 2017 Author Share Posted April 7, 2017 I feel dreadfully embarrassed. I have to admit I actually approve of something Trump has done, namely bombing the Syrian airbase which was reputed to have launched the chemical attack. Of course it`s actually going against another of his campaign promises (don`t get involved in foreign wars) so does that increase or decrease the chances he`ll serve his full term ? Or increase or decrease his popularity ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacktari Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 I feel dreadfully embarrassed. I have to admit I actually approve of something Trump has done, namely bombing the Syrian airbase which was reputed to have launched the chemical attack. Of course it`s actually going against another of his campaign promises (don`t get involved in foreign wars) so does that increase or decrease the chances he`ll serve his full term ? Or increase or decrease his popularity ? He is pulling the Thatcher tactic, and among the rabble it did her no harm. Don't be fooled as we were 35 years ago. Making war against a weaker foe, where victory is practically nailed on, is a sure fire way to court popularity among the thickoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 I feel dreadfully embarrassed. I have to admit I actually approve of something Trump has done, namely bombing the Syrian airbase which was reputed to have launched the chemical attack. Of course it`s actually going against another of his campaign promises (don`t get involved in foreign wars) so does that increase or decrease the chances he`ll serve his full term ? Or increase or decrease his popularity ? Assad didn't launch the chemical weapons, you are actually approving of a false flag operation to help the terrorists disguised as so called rebels to overthrow Assad. Why would Assad use chemicals when he is winning the war? An investigation has not been completed and Assad is already found to be the culprit? The Syrian version that they bombed a rebel area where they were storing chemical weapons sounds more plausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Smith Posted April 7, 2017 Author Share Posted April 7, 2017 Assad didn't launch the chemical weapons, you are actually approving of a false flag operation to help the terrorists disguised as so called rebels to overthrow Assad. Why would Assad use chemicals when he is winning the war? An investigation has not been completed and Assad is already found to be the culprit? The Syrian version that they bombed a rebel area where they were storing chemical weapons sounds more plausible. In some ways I agree with you that the chemical attack makes no sense, but your last comment has been debunked. In addition on R4`s Today programme the presenter was saying a Guardian journalist was actually in the vicinity and says no damage (from a conventional bombing attack) was found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertramp Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Assad didn't launch the chemical weapons, you are actually approving of a false flag operation to help the terrorists disguised as so called rebels to overthrow Assad. Why would Assad use chemicals when he is winning the war? An investigation has not been completed and Assad is already found to be the culprit? The Syrian version that they bombed a rebel area where they were storing chemical weapons sounds more plausible. An investigation has not been completed so how come you're so sure it wasn't Assad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted April 7, 2017 Share Posted April 7, 2017 Assad didn't launch the chemical weapons, you are actually approving of a false flag operation to help the terrorists disguised as so called rebels to overthrow Assad. Why would Assad use chemicals when he is winning the war? An investigation has not been completed and Assad is already found to be the culprit? The Syrian version that they bombed a rebel area where they were storing chemical weapons sounds more plausible. If you could go any where near to proving that, that would be awesome. Assad isn't going anywhere, the Russians are backing him to the hilt and the US know this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Smith Posted April 8, 2017 Author Share Posted April 8, 2017 Only as irony. I have no respect for the man whatsoever, and not much more for most of the electorate who voted for him. If and when he makes his infamous (and totally unwarranted) state visit to this country I`m hoping to go on the demo, my first political demo. But to me it won`t just be about Trump, it`ll be about the rise of populistic nationalism generally, as I think it will be for most who attend. Since ordering the bombing of the airfield which (as far as everyone knows) carried out the chemical attack, I have to say I`ve rather lost enthusiasm for going on any anti-Trump demo. Don`t get me wrong, I`m still for from a Trump fan, but I don`t dislike him quite as much as I did. Not enough to travel 165 miles to demonstrate against him anyway ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacktari Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 Since ordering the bombing of the airfield which (as far as everyone knows) carried out the chemical attack, I have to say I`ve rather lost enthusiasm for going on any anti-Trump demo. Don`t get me wrong, I`m still for from a Trump fan, but I don`t dislike him quite as much as I did. Not enough to travel 165 miles to demonstrate against him anyway ! Goebbels used to love that attitude in people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now