I believe they were just pointing out that "perception is reality". I'm liberal. I know what my side means by "defund the police". It's still a counterproductive statement. You don't even need the braindead right-wing news entertainment networks, you just have to read the statement without context. It's textbook "bad advertising" unfortunately.

How much clearer can I say this: There is zero fucking relevance to how many people the IRGC has killed. We literally have zero control over that. Unless your advocating for a "boots on the ground" invasion that exterminates the IRGC?

Again, since you apparently have reading comprehension issues: I DID NOT SAY THESE THINGS ARE THE SAME. Fuck, is talking to people like you painful.

How the hell can you say it was unintentional? They blew up a god damn building with no clue what was inside of it. It's an "accident" in the same way a person with a .025BAC plowing into a school bus is an "accident". Or a hunter not knowing what's behind whatever he's shooting at. Or blindly lobbing cruise missiles at targets that haven't been vetted. You can mince words all day long, debating on the definition of "accident", doesn't change the fact that it was willfully negligent.

No, Kegseth didn't see the target, know it was a school, pop a rage-boner, and hit "fire". But what he ordered was about one level of willful incompetence below that.

Again, just fuck all the way off already.

If we hadn't elected a foreign policy autist we would could have been well underway negotiating the extension as originally planned.

Was Iran following the agreement or not?

So that's what we're doing now, right? Seems to be working out pretty well. /s

Well, at least we have some common ground here. Based on the rest of your post, I suspect we differ on our opinion as to why it's going to be infinitely worse to dig out of. Now we have no agreement. Now we have no diplomacy. Now we have a far more radicalized leadership. Now we're stuck in another middle east "conflict" with no plan and no endgame.

So your "answer" for specifics on how Harris would have made things more awful is 1) You didn't like Biden's policies. 2) You heard she wasn't prepared for meetings, and her politi-speak on TV reinforced that perception for you. and 3) She dropped out of the 2020 primary. Got it.

That's an "excellent" non-answer to the question.

You crack me up. That's some solid trolling there. Keep up the good work! (Or were you serious with that comment? It's tough to tell, sarcasm doesn't transit the internet well. I refuse to believe there are actually people legitimately stupid enough to have written what you did in seriousness, so I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.)

How far we've come.

Nope. We purposefully killed a 150. There was nothing "accidental" about it.

Could you please highlight the portion of my comment where I implied anything close to "both sides are the same"? What? I didn't? Then how about you just fuck all the way off?

We're not at war. Just ask the Commander in Chief. This was one answer he's given recently "I call it a military conflict, because it's small potatoes for us"

My serious response to your comments: I have a hard time being convinced this was a "fog of war" thing. Fog implies lack of visibility. It implies mistakes were made due to quick actions made with imperfect information. Nothing in the article seems to imply that's what happened. They got a target package from AI. The people responsible for verifying the information had long been shitcanned. And against the objections of his senior leadership, the Fox News host killed 150 people. There was certainly fog, but it wasn't the "war" type.

Come on. You can't be out here with all these facts (not to be confused with "alternative facts") that absolutely destroy the "both sides" and "what about BIIIIIIIIDEN" responses to the whole Epstein thing. It takes a particularly short MAGA memory to forget that Trump literally, in the actual literal sense of the word, ran on a "release the files" platform. Now they're mad that it continues to be a thing. It makes me smile.

I'll come up with a better joke as soon as you get your panties out of a twist. Fucks' sake, man.

I was riffing solely on the "don't give crooks and liars publicity" part. Why shut down the conduit of information when you can shut down the source? But, whatever, it was an attempt at a joke.

Fixed 'er for ya.

I see the mods are persistent as well.

Oh just fuck all the way off. You "identified" under $4M worth of programs that you 1) probably don't understand what they actually were, and 2) disagree with purely on your own principles. YOU don't want your tax dollars being spent on anything that even smells "trans adjacent". I, am 100% onboard with my tax dollars going to support such things. If it's a moral victory for you, pretend that the $0.04 you contributed to those programs went to buy a bomb instead. I'll mentally double my contribution to the cause to $0.08.

My guy, it's $12m dollars, and it isn't even a USAID thing. Yes, fraud is bad. Yes, we should root it out and eliminate it. But using that as "justification" for shutting down USAID is misplaced, at best, and downright evil at worst. But hey, even though kids are quite literally starving to death, thank god there won't be any more transgender operas in Columbia. Dick.