FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Mark Rutte, NATO chief
Mark Rutte, NATO chief
Jump to: Newest in thread
Needs to grow a set imo.
I see he’s been licking Tango’s arse (again) whilst Tango has given him a bollocking for not helping out in Iran.
It’s a defensive alliance. Not one which should be starting dubious wars without the consensus of allies.
Rutte’s sycophancy is nauseating.
Europe needs to do whatever it takes to go it alone.
I’d start playing the Chinese & USA against each other to extract gains tbh |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *otMe66Man 4 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
The lack of diplomacy shown by Trump is ridiculed and berated here, and when someone does display diplomacy they receive the same outcome.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lack of diplomacy shown by Trump is ridiculed and berated here, and when someone does display diplomacy they receive the same outcome.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.
"
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 4 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"The lack of diplomacy shown by Trump is ridiculed and berated here, and when someone does display diplomacy they receive the same outcome.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end."
What has that got to do with diplomacy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Absolutely the US should leave NATO and Europe should stand on its own two feet. Maybe the Europeans should expel the US.
Where’s the extra money going to come from for all this extra military expenditure when we can no longer rely on the Americans? Which benefits and public services are going to be cut? Will there be conscription?
The Europeans are a joke. Starmer is a national embarrassment, flying around the globe on expenses desperately trying to look relevant.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Absolutely the US should leave NATO and Europe should stand on its own two feet. Maybe the Europeans should expel the US.
Where’s the extra money going to come from for all this extra military expenditure when we can no longer rely on the Americans? Which benefits and public services are going to be cut? Will there be conscription?
The Europeans are a joke. Starmer is a national embarrassment, flying around the globe on expenses desperately trying to look relevant.
"
It’s obviously not going to happen overnight, but happen it should. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lack of diplomacy shown by Trump is ridiculed and berated here, and when someone does display diplomacy they receive the same outcome.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end.
What has that got to do with diplomacy? "
Neville Chamberlain was a big proponent of diplomacy.
Didn’t Trump use the example of Chamberlain to insult Starmer (yet again) ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The issue isnt Rutter its who he and the rest of the Europe and Nato countries are dealing with..
In relation to Nato funding trump was right and Europe has realised just how much because of Ukraine how far they've fallen below where they need to be..
But he's not a pragmatic person or a politician and cares little for the diplomatic norms and subsequently how such things work at those levels don't apply to him so he has to be dealt with at the level he understands and knows..
Telling him to do one would be similar to stopping a teenager going out on a Friday with his mates, complete strop and over reaction..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The issue isnt Rutter its who he and the rest of the Europe and Nato countries are dealing with..
In relation to Nato funding trump was right and Europe has realised just how much because of Ukraine how far they've fallen below where they need to be..
But he's not a pragmatic person or a politician and cares little for the diplomatic norms and subsequently how such things work at those levels don't apply to him so he has to be dealt with at the level he understands and knows..
Telling him to do one would be similar to stopping a teenager going out on a Friday with his mates, complete strop and over reaction..
"
As said, let’s say we’re going to hook up with the Chinese, see how he reacts to that.
There has to be a point where we say enough of this BS.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The issue isnt Rutter its who he and the rest of the Europe and Nato countries are dealing with..
In relation to Nato funding trump was right and Europe has realised just how much because of Ukraine how far they've fallen below where they need to be..
But he's not a pragmatic person or a politician and cares little for the diplomatic norms and subsequently how such things work at those levels don't apply to him so he has to be dealt with at the level he understands and knows..
Telling him to do one would be similar to stopping a teenager going out on a Friday with his mates, complete strop and over reaction..
As said, let’s say we’re going to hook up with the Chinese, see how he reacts to that.
There has to be a point where we say enough of this BS.
"
The only flaw in that is trump will be gone in less than three years, America despite its flaws is a far better bed fellow than China..
America has China on its shoulder military wise and the former won't want to lose its bases in Europe and Diego Garcia plus others..
I could be wrong but my thinking is that pragmatism will prevail in Washington going forward but none of us can understand or underestimate the thinking of the current POTUS, im not sure those around him at the highest levels know what he might do so we are living in truly uncertain times.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Absolutely the US should leave NATO and Europe should stand on its own two feet. Maybe the Europeans should expel the US.
Where’s the extra money going to come from for all this extra military expenditure when we can no longer rely on the Americans? Which benefits and public services are going to be cut? Will there be conscription?
The Europeans are a joke. Starmer is a national embarrassment, flying around the globe on expenses desperately trying to look relevant.
It’s obviously not going to happen overnight, but happen it should."
It won’t happen. Given the choice between defence and continuing to lounge about on benefits, the Europeans will always choose to stay in their comfortable benefits-induced stupor. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The issue isnt Rutter its who he and the rest of the Europe and Nato countries are dealing with..
In relation to Nato funding trump was right and Europe has realised just how much because of Ukraine how far they've fallen below where they need to be..
But he's not a pragmatic person or a politician and cares little for the diplomatic norms and subsequently how such things work at those levels don't apply to him so he has to be dealt with at the level he understands and knows..
Telling him to do one would be similar to stopping a teenager going out on a Friday with his mates, complete strop and over reaction..
As said, let’s say we’re going to hook up with the Chinese, see how he reacts to that.
There has to be a point where we say enough of this BS.
The only flaw in that is trump will be gone in less than three years, America despite its flaws is a far better bed fellow than China..
America has China on its shoulder military wise and the former won't want to lose its bases in Europe and Diego Garcia plus others..
I could be wrong but my thinking is that pragmatism will prevail in Washington going forward but none of us can understand or underestimate the thinking of the current POTUS, im not sure those around him at the highest levels know what he might do so we are living in truly uncertain times.."
Given that the US is fast becoming a basket case, I’d rather not have the UK’s defence subject to the whims of the US voter every four years.
We don’t seem to have a problem trading with China do we?
What was it Carney said?
‘The middle powers need to unite against economic coercion from great powers’
That would be the other option. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Absolutely the US should leave NATO and Europe should stand on its own two feet. Maybe the Europeans should expel the US.
Where’s the extra money going to come from for all this extra military expenditure when we can no longer rely on the Americans? Which benefits and public services are going to be cut? Will there be conscription?
The Europeans are a joke. Starmer is a national embarrassment, flying around the globe on expenses desperately trying to look relevant.
It’s obviously not going to happen overnight, but happen it should.
It won’t happen. Given the choice between defence and continuing to lounge about on benefits, the Europeans will always choose to stay in their comfortable benefits-induced stupor."
I mean, we *could* find the money if we really, really wanted to. And Europe’s GDP dwarfs our supposed ‘main threat’ Russia’s.
It’s not only Europe living beyond its means btw, the US is 40 trillion in debt in a low tax, low welfare, small government environment |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The issue isnt Rutter its who he and the rest of the Europe and Nato countries are dealing with..
In relation to Nato funding trump was right and Europe has realised just how much because of Ukraine how far they've fallen below where they need to be..
But he's not a pragmatic person or a politician and cares little for the diplomatic norms and subsequently how such things work at those levels don't apply to him so he has to be dealt with at the level he understands and knows..
Telling him to do one would be similar to stopping a teenager going out on a Friday with his mates, complete strop and over reaction..
As said, let’s say we’re going to hook up with the Chinese, see how he reacts to that.
There has to be a point where we say enough of this BS.
The only flaw in that is trump will be gone in less than three years, America despite its flaws is a far better bed fellow than China..
America has China on its shoulder military wise and the former won't want to lose its bases in Europe and Diego Garcia plus others..
I could be wrong but my thinking is that pragmatism will prevail in Washington going forward but none of us can understand or underestimate the thinking of the current POTUS, im not sure those around him at the highest levels know what he might do so we are living in truly uncertain times..
Given that the US is fast becoming a basket case, I’d rather not have the UK’s defence subject to the whims of the US voter every four years.
We don’t seem to have a problem trading with China do we?
What was it Carney said?
‘The middle powers need to unite against economic coercion from great powers’
That would be the other option."
Trading is where we are with many reasons why they have become what they are in that area and the rest of us haven't, giving access via 'shared collaborations' in other areas will only be used against us at some point..
Democracy for all its many flaws is preferable to something like the Chinese Comminist Party model of governance..
Carney was spot on with that, the thing us in many areas it will take time to get to anywhere where the influence and decisions of some other nutter in the white house isnt so important.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists."
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
"
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi.."
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
‘Soft power & pragmatism’
Pity the US don’t offer the world a bit more of that instead of blowing up innocent people around the world on a frequent basis then wondering why a lot of people resent them so much. Then when this resentment leads to action, they justify yet more death & misery by pointing at the resentment.
Make.it.stop. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
"
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
‘Soft power & pragmatism’
Pity the US don’t offer the world a bit more of that instead of blowing up innocent people around the world on a frequent basis then wondering why a lot of people resent them so much. Then when this resentment leads to action, they justify yet more death & misery by pointing at the resentment.
Make.it.stop."
I prefer to look at their history and criticise accordingly, tbh we are all as Nations guilty of the same..
Trust no one fully..
America post ww2 have much to he criticised for and dont seem to learn the lessons of past foreign interventions.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess."
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?"
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region. "
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
"
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here ! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here ! "
You seem to get your rocks off on the fact that Tango makes these threats on social media but then doesn’t follow through on them, going on to worship him as some kind of genius.
Let me ask you a simple question:
Do you think Trump’s Social Media conduct is befitting of someone holding the office of President of the United States? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
It won’t happen. Given the choice between defence and continuing to lounge about on benefits, the Europeans will always choose to stay in their comfortable benefits-induced stupor."
Do you lounge about on benefits? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess."
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
"
Don’t mention the Uyghurs, Tibet, or Hong Kong.
The Chinese used to be the enemy, now the Left increasingly sees them as the Model.
Given that achieving net zero requires us to buy lots of stuff from China, the UK will effectively become a CCP lackey colony anyway.
Interesting that Israel has banned Chinese made cars from sensitive areas of the country and from use by some military personnel. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
When asked if it "bothered him at all" when Trump "threatened to kill the entire Iranian civilization," Rutte's response was simply: "what I want you to know is I support the President and I know a large part of Europe do."
FFS. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"When asked if it "bothered him at all" when Trump "threatened to kill the entire Iranian civilization," Rutte's response was simply: "what I want you to know is I support the President and I know a large part of Europe do."
FFS."
Not in my name..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here !
You seem to get your rocks off on the fact that Tango makes these threats on social media but then doesn’t follow through on them, going on to worship him as some kind of genius.
Let me ask you a simple question:
Do you think Trump’s Social Media conduct is befitting of someone holding the office of President of the United States?"
'Get your rocks off' - personal attack, disappointing
'Worship him as some kind of genius.' - never said anything like that so a fabrication
And as you wouldn't answer a very straight forward question you'll have to forgive me for not answering yours. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
"
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here !
You seem to get your rocks off on the fact that Tango makes these threats on social media but then doesn’t follow through on them, going on to worship him as some kind of genius.
Let me ask you a simple question:
Do you think Trump’s Social Media conduct is befitting of someone holding the office of President of the United States?
'Get your rocks off' - personal attack, disappointing
'Worship him as some kind of genius.' - never said anything like that so a fabrication
And as you wouldn't answer a very straight forward question you'll have to forgive me for not answering yours."
Total cop out
You laud him on here at every available opportunity.
Answer the question. Or is there no answer  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
Don’t mention the Uyghurs, Tibet, or Hong Kong.
The Chinese used to be the enemy, now the Left increasingly sees them as the Model.
Given that achieving net zero requires us to buy lots of stuff from China, the UK will effectively become a CCP lackey colony anyway.
Interesting that Israel has banned Chinese made cars from sensitive areas of the country and from use by some military personnel. "
We’re on about Chinese foreign policy aren’t we? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here !
You seem to get your rocks off on the fact that Tango makes these threats on social media but then doesn’t follow through on them, going on to worship him as some kind of genius.
Let me ask you a simple question:
Do you think Trump’s Social Media conduct is befitting of someone holding the office of President of the United States?
'Get your rocks off' - personal attack, disappointing
'Worship him as some kind of genius.' - never said anything like that so a fabrication
And as you wouldn't answer a very straight forward question you'll have to forgive me for not answering yours.
Total cop out
You laud him on here at every available opportunity.
Answer the question. Or is there no answer "
Abuse, invent, demand.
Enjoy the sunshine.😎 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
Well, the two aren’t the same really are they, given that the US have killed thousands of people in Iran already just prior to making those threats.
What’s the scores on the doors with China & the Taiwanese?
No, they're exactly the same. Trump, was attacked for the specific threat to launch a much larger bombing attack on Iran including 'civilian' infrastructure. There was a whole thread about it. And even when it didn't happen people compared it to terrible things that had happened.
China had claimed Taiwan as its own for decades and threatened an invasion in many ways, only deterred by the US military strength in the region.
Have China bombed any Taiwanese schools recently before going on to make threats to wipe out Taiwanese civilisation?
No, they have flown a few jets in Taiwanese airspace now & again & indulged in some cyber warfare.
You are avoiding the point I made because you know it shows up the double standards people have on anything relating to the US in general and Trump in particular.
It's cool, no one has to answer anyone here !
You seem to get your rocks off on the fact that Tango makes these threats on social media but then doesn’t follow through on them, going on to worship him as some kind of genius.
Let me ask you a simple question:
Do you think Trump’s Social Media conduct is befitting of someone holding the office of President of the United States?
'Get your rocks off' - personal attack, disappointing
'Worship him as some kind of genius.' - never said anything like that so a fabrication
And as you wouldn't answer a very straight forward question you'll have to forgive me for not answering yours.
Total cop out
You laud him on here at every available opportunity.
Answer the question. Or is there no answer
Abuse, invent, demand.
Enjoy the sunshine.😎"
Deflect, deflect, deflect |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
...
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end."
I didn’t realise that it was only Iranian civilisation that Trump was on the verge of wiping out... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
...
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end.
I didn’t realise that it was only Iranian civilisation that Trump was on the verge of wiping out..."
Quite |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS."
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
"
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
"
You know what you said and everyone sees your constant deflection for trump, own it..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
"
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
You know what you said and everyone sees your constant deflection for trump, own it..
"
So it should be very easy for you to copy and paste my words of support then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
"
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread."
Moral equivalence doesn’t come into it & your ducking & diving doesn’t wash.
Silence doesn’t necessarily equal approval.
Correct?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
"
Heaven forbid that as well as making stuff up on at least 3 occasions then when pointed out and corrected they say something like 'I dont respond to insults' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread."
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Moral equivalence doesn’t come into it & your ducking & diving doesn’t wash.
Silence doesn’t necessarily equal approval.
Correct?
"
Absolutely correct, as I have patiently explained to the other poster.
And to me morality is the heart of this issue. I'm not interested in partisan political name calling - whether that's a minority or majority opinion is utterly irrelevant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated.. "
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"And to me morality is the heart of this issue. I'm not interested in partisan political name calling - whether that's a minority or majority opinion is utterly irrelevant."
Do you self identify as a "libertarian"?
If so, what kind of morality do you espouse? I'm guessing it's different to the morality that the Iranian mullahs espouse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The lack of diplomacy shown by Trump is ridiculed and berated here, and when someone does display diplomacy they receive the same outcome.
Damned if you do and damned if you don't springs to mind.
Trump threatened to wipe out Iranian civilisation the other day in remarks that brought condemnation from the Pope & the UN chief.
Western leaders were silent.
The Europeans are doormats for the US & this example shows it’s got to end."
ah the un that isnt worth a wank and the pop head of an organisation that ignore peadophiles mmmm i wont be taking any notice of either |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation."
False accusations?
You practically think anybody who criticises Trump is a paid up member of the IRGC. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation."
If you care to show me where I called you a bot?
Your support was evident by your usual refusal to do anything other than deflect and not acknowledge or accept that the threats made to destroy a civilisation and reduce a country to the 'stone age' are wrong in their stated intent..
Similarly when children are killed in Lebanon you waffle away rather than condemn such barbarous acts.
Your stance is that of a one eyed person seemingly fine with such things..
Innocents are just that no matter if they are western or Shia or Jews..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation.
If you care to show me where I called you a bot?
Your support was evident by your usual refusal to do anything other than deflect and not acknowledge or accept that the threats made to destroy a civilisation and reduce a country to the 'stone age' are wrong in their stated intent..
Similarly when children are killed in Lebanon you waffle away rather than condemn such barbarous acts.
Your stance is that of a one eyed person seemingly fine with such things..
Innocents are just that no matter if they are western or Shia or Jews..
"
So no evidence then.✔️
So a lie.✔️
Coolio 😎 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation.
False accusations?
You practically think anybody who criticises Trump is a paid up member of the IRGC."
Therefore it should be very easy to quote the where I've directly accused another poster of such things. I'll wait 😎 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation.
False accusations?
You practically think anybody who criticises Trump is a paid up member of the IRGC.
Therefore it should be very easy to quote the where I've directly accused another poster of such things. I'll wait 😎"
No, because it’s a flippant exaggeration to make the point.
Because it’s more effective than saying yet again that you noticing people being relatively silent on Iranian brutality means in your mind they give tacit approval.
But you knew that didn’t you  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation.
If you care to show me where I called you a bot?
Your support was evident by your usual refusal to do anything other than deflect and not acknowledge or accept that the threats made to destroy a civilisation and reduce a country to the 'stone age' are wrong in their stated intent..
Similarly when children are killed in Lebanon you waffle away rather than condemn such barbarous acts.
Your stance is that of a one eyed person seemingly fine with such things..
Innocents are just that no matter if they are western or Shia or Jews..
So no evidence then.✔️
So a lie.✔️
Coolio 😎"
Must be just myself who've spotted how you deflect and try to distract.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 4 weeks ago
|
"Britain must urgently seek to replace NATO by concluding peace treaties with the peaceful nations led by China and Russia, to guarantee our defensive security, energy supply, and independence from the Great Satan. I propose it's called the Chinese Russian Alliance of Pragmatists.
To be fair, China haven’t had a major war since 1979.
They're keeping their powder dry..
I think they are more about the threat of at this moment and in time if they eclipse America in that area im still not sure they will for instance invade Taiwan ..
Soft power and pragmatism seems a large part of their modus operandi..
They are keeping their powder dry. Maybe. But I prefer not to criticise based purely on assumptions. If they invade Taiwan, that’s the time for criticism of China’s foreign policy.
I recall a lot of criticism for the 'assumption' that the US would 'end a civilisation' yesterday, although of course it didn't happen.
But different strokes I guess.
The criticism for the language from the so called leader of the free world was absolutely justified and correct..
He let his office down and the values that they allegedly espouse as a Nation..
It wasn't an assumption, no matter how much you continue to deflect from any criticism of him it was a direct threat and it went beyond acceptable..
Criticism of language used, absolutely fair.
Criticism of actions which didn't take place and direct comparisons to those which did, pure TDS.
No, it's perfectly fine and acceptable to criticise someone's stated intentions if those cross a line..
To have the Pope criticising an American President in the modern age is a new low he's dragging that office down towards..
I doubt for you there are any lines he might cross or say but I think in this instance supporting what he threatened or whataboutery is a minority view..
Can you tell me where I supported what Trump said with reference to the increased bombing, etc ?
Can’t remember you criticising it.
Funny, you’re the one who bleats on and on about people being silent & not criticising ‘50,000’ Iranian civilian deaths during the protests earlier this year.
Are you now using the same defence that silence doesn’t necessarily mean approval?
I hope not, because that would make you a hypocrite wouldn’t it.
Well I guess it would if there was any moral equivalence between the massacres of 50,000 civilians and some words which were not acted on. But as there isn't, it doesn't.
No I didn't criticise the words, but nor did I ignore the threads where the issue was raised. Nor did I support the words as the other poster will find if they check the thread.
Deflect, embellish, obfuscate..
I read somewhere that such constants are similar to algorithms when bots are initiated..
Ah so I'm a 'bot' now. Another for the list of personal insults from those lacking in arguments or evidence.
And for the last time, please quote the post where I supported Trump's words about further bombing of Iran, or have the common decent to acknowledge this was a false accusation.
False accusations?
You practically think anybody who criticises Trump is a paid up member of the IRGC.
Therefore it should be very easy to quote the where I've directly accused another poster of such things. I'll wait 😎
No, because it’s a flippant exaggeration to make the point.
Because it’s more effective than saying yet again that you noticing people being relatively silent on Iranian brutality means in your mind they give tacit approval.
But you knew that didn’t you "
Thank you for clarifying.
And you are quite correct, I do question - in my mind- what some posters think about the Iranian regime and why they were not quicker to condemn the massacres.
What I don't do is accuse any individual of anything in Forum without evidence, because that would come under the banner of a 'false accusation', as has been seen on this thread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
What I don't do is accuse any individual of anything in Forum without evidence, because that would come under the banner of a 'false accusation', as has been seen on this thread."
You mean apart from the false accusations you made about crime rates not so long ago? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
