Thats your problem, all you care about is winning a online debate, which means nothing past the words you type, you have not helped or informed anyone, you just get the pleasure of thinking "AH, HA, I won on a interent forum", you don't actually care about where the implications are leading.
You simply don't understand that the military only trains for missions that they are about to commence on. You fail to realize what conditioning the public is. You failed to realize that training or not, deploying troops in cities is beyond wrong unless there is some sort of natural disaster or martial law.
You don't train in a jungle, to fight in the desert.
This is common sense stuff.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Thats your problem, all you care about is winning a online debate, which means nothing past the words you type, you have not helped or informed anyone, you just get the pleasure of thinking "AH, HA, I won on a interent forum", you don't actually care about where the implications are leading.You simply don't understand that the military only trains for missions that they are about to commence on. You fail to realize what conditioning the public is. You failed to realize that training or not, deploying troops in cities is beyond wrong unless there is some sort of natural disaster or martial law.
You don't train in a jungle, to fight in the desert.
This is common sense stuff.
Yes, but you would train in one city to fight in another city in another country.
There's a decent chance these troops are training for low intensity/stealthy combat in Eastern European cities in the event that the Russians repeat their activities in Russia in the Baltic States. That's one explanation that's much more plausible than "OMG MARTIAL LAW IS COMING!!"
Originally posted by Omega Vision
And you just avoided substantiating your position again. Bravo.Yes, but you would train in one city to fight in another city in another country.
There's a decent chance these troops are training for low intensity/stealthy combat in Eastern European cities in the event that the Russians repeat their activities in Russia in the Baltic States. That's one explanation that's much more plausible than "OMG MARTIAL LAW IS COMING!!"
So they can't train in something that will look like the Baltic States? When we trained for Iraq we they built cities that looked like Iraq, funny enough, now they building cities that look like America.
Originally posted by Time Immemorial
So they can't train in something that will look like the Baltic States? When we trained for Iraq we they built cities that looked like Iraq, funny enough, now they building cities that look like America.
They chose the American Southwest, Texas, and southern California to stage the training exercises, so we'd have to look at what kinds of places have similar geography and climates. For Southern California, with its mix of desert, city, and Mediterranean climate coastline it's probably the closest you can get to simulating a ground operation in coastal Libya or Syria on United States soil. Texas, due to its size and diversity, can stand in for a lot of places that Americans might get involved in.
Pay attention to the fact that Jade Helm is supposed to train soldiers to operate quietly, without attracting too much attention from the local populace. While no part of me believes that Jade Helm is in any way prepping for a military takeover of the US, I am inclined to believe that it could be preparation for off-the-record black or gray interventions overseas, interventions where the US doesn't recognize or acknowledge their own operations (perhaps taking a cue from Russia's more or less successful covert hiding-in-plain-sight-and-lying-with-a-straight-face operations in Ukraine).
Originally posted by Time Immemorialhttp://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/societyquote.asp
edit: STFU DDM
Originally posted by Star428You should probably check your facts before blindly agreeing with pictures online, sheep.
The resemblance is striking. Needless to say, there's no way I'll ever be convinced to vote for her now. I've said it before that even Mickey Mouse would be preferable to her being the C-in-C. Even more convinced now. Thanks, TI.Edit: Yeah, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few but as Americans we have individual liberties that should never be tampered with even it's under the guise of "it's for the greater good of the many". Like our right to bear arms, for example.
Reminds me of those people who say that (according to popular belief) because Hitler was a vegan, all vegans are evil.
As far as Hilary goes, just like Obama in the '12 election, she may not be the most superlative candidate ever, but she's undoubtedly the best on the card and the one I'll probably be voting for. All of her mess ups don't even remotely compare to the reign of terror the GOP has subjected America to over the past 6 years. Hilary may have said something stupid at some point, but at no point did she shut down the government, veto every bill the POTUS attempted to pass purely out of spite (including a bill to aid veterans), threaten to destroy the US economy, and treasonously humiliate America's foreign policy (amongst other things) like the GOP did. The Benghazi mess up and the ultimately pointless "email scandal" aren't even in the same league as the GOP's shenanigans.
Originally posted by NemeBro
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/societyquote.aspedit: STFU DDM
Originally posted by Robtard
Not only it being false, but the "If Hitler said it, it must be bad!" no matter what mentality.
Thank you both for stating things, but in much poorer ways, I have already stated. uhuh
estahuh