Top General feared Trump would launch nukes.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
From neutral standpoint, this is treason.

Who expects to fight a war with generals like these? Sometimes a war might come to you unexpectedly. DPRK tested an ICBM not long ago.

Donald Trump threated to bomb DPRK for testing an ICBM on the other hand. He had more guts in this respect than any other POTUS in recent memory.

Trump did not start any war in his tenure though. Credit should be given where due. He is a loudmouth but he is not a warmonger. Hillary is opposite in this respect.

Trump might be bad but Joe Biden is worse. Biden ditched Afghanistan and pissed off France in short order. France have recalled its ambassador to USA just now.

Signs of decline?

Um, it's not treason.

Um, Trump didn't start a war, but he upped the bomb dropping game in his four years: Trump pledged to stop 'endless wars' but his airstrikes in Afghanistan increased civilian deaths by 330% since 2016

Um, Clinton is a "warmonger", but Trump is "tough" for threatening to start wars? Wouldn't they both be loudmouth warmongers?

Um, Trump's the one who made a peace deal with the Taliban in Feb of 2020 and didn't include the Afghanistan government, the Taliban was always going to regain control

Um, France is fine, it's grandstanding. We're still allies.

You sound pretty biased and uninformed for a "neutral" person.

So we go and nuke at China and China say fire nukes and USA be like, **** we dumb. Then nuclear winter. Okay?

Rightist need to understand that a real war with China is a lose-lose for all. I don't care how big their pro-war hardons are.

It’s called M.A.D.

Mutually assured destruction.

And they're f**king mad for having war-boners over it happening, m8

It’s only a minority of murkans… at least Moore says that.

Originally posted by Robtard
Um, it's not treason.

Um, Trump didn't start a war, but he upped the bomb dropping game in his four years: Trump pledged to stop 'endless wars' but his airstrikes in Afghanistan increased civilian deaths by 330% since 2016

Um, Clinton is a "warmonger", but Trump is "tough" for threatening to start wars? Wouldn't they both be loudmouth warmongers?

Um, Trump's the one who made a peace deal with the Taliban in Feb of 2020 and didn't include the Afghanistan government, the Taliban was always going to regain control

Um, France is fine, it's grandstanding. We're still allies.

You sound pretty biased and uninformed for a "neutral" person. [/B]

If you have to fight a war due to a political situation, your general should not tell your enemy what you are thinking. Element of surprise will be your advantage. Alerting your enemy might lead to defeat otherwise.

2. Do you realize that USA was at war with the opposing faction (Afghan Taliban) in Afghanistan at the time? The faction which was looking forward to topple your allies in Afghanistan? You would allow them to overrun your allies instead? Well, this is exactly what Joe Biden did in Afghanistan. No wonder your own allies in Europe are upset. This is like as if you have no sense of warfare and commitments. What if terrorism resurge in Afghanistan? Would a general call them as well?

3. Hillary Clinton was an Architect of war in Libya (a virtually harmless country).

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/hillary-the-hawk-a-history-clinton-2016-military-intervention-libya-iraq-syria/

https://www.cato.org/commentary/obama-administration-wrecked-libya-generation

Trump threatened to bomb a country which is developing weapons to erase your cities, to stop said country in its tracks.

Understand the difference.

4. Really?

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/france-recalls-ambassadors-to-u-s-australia-11631908666

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-france-diplomacy-australia-f37d09fd0b90e41cf0366e833f325a3a

Who is responsible for this development?

Those who wish to see NATO fall apart, are laughing right now.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/08/09/russias-hybrid-warfare-toolkit-has-more-to-offer-than-propaganda/

5. Sure, friend. You do not understand global politics, and you cannot even recognize treason. Good going at this rate. USA have a bright future ahead.

This is not about Democrats or Republicans - this is about understanding global politics and threats.

In regards to possibility of a nuclear war, never assume that it cannot happen. There can be unexpected triggers. It would be much better to have contingency planning and how to fight one. Blind adherence to MAD doctrine is stupid.

Regards.

To anyone who is still making excuses for or downplaying the treasonous behavior of what this man did or even going so far as to disgustingly call him a "hero" needs their friggin' head examined.

There is no justifiable excuse for what he did. Period.

I know leftists love to try and spin villains into heroes and heroes into villains but it won't work here I can assure you. Traitors aren't heroes and to have such a traitor in such a high-ranking position in our government is scary and deeply concerning.

He needs to be removed and court-martialled ASAP.

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
To anyone who is still making excuses for or downplaying the treasonous behavior of what this man did or even goi.

Remember that time the US pondered the idea of demonstrating the atom bomb to the Japanese leadership in WW2 instead of actually bombing them?

Traitors...

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
1. POTUS = Commander in Chief. One fine day a general decides to alert another country to perceived motives of POTUS about it on his own = colluding with said country. This is what a SPY would do and is treason. Notice the word 'perceived' as well.

If you have to fight a war due to a political situation, your general should not tell your enemy what you are thinking. Element of surprise will be your advantage. Alerting your enemy might lead to defeat otherwise.

2. Do you realize that USA was at war with the opposing faction (Afghan Taliban) in Afghanistan at the time? The faction which was looking forward to topple your allies in Afghanistan? You would allow them to overrun your allies instead? Well, this is exactly what Joe Biden did in Afghanistan. No wonder your own allies in Europe are upset. This is like as if you have no sense of warfare and commitments. What if terrorism resurge in Afghanistan? Would a general call them as well?

3. Hillary Clinton was an Architect of war in Libya (a virtually harmless country).

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/hillary-the-hawk-a-history-clinton-2016-military-intervention-libya-iraq-syria/

https://www.cato.org/commentary/obama-administration-wrecked-libya-generation

Trump threatened to bomb a country which is developing weapons to erase your cities, to stop said country in its tracks.

Understand the difference.

4. Really?

https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/france-recalls-ambassadors-to-u-s-australia-11631908666

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-france-diplomacy-australia-f37d09fd0b90e41cf0366e833f325a3a

Who is responsible for this development?

Those who wish to see NATO fall apart, are laughing right now.

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2019/08/09/russias-hybrid-warfare-toolkit-has-more-to-offer-than-propaganda/

5. Sure, friend. You do not understand global politics, and you cannot even recognize treason. Good going at this rate. USA have a bright future ahead.

This is not about Democrats or Republicans - this is about understanding global politics and threats.

In regards to possibility of a nuclear war, never assume that it cannot happen. There can be unexpected triggers. It would be much better to have contingency planning and how to fight one. Blind adherence to MAD doctrine is stupid.

Regards.

Cool story. Do you have any sources that are not Libertarian, Republican, or otherwise conservative?

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Remember that time the US pondered the idea of demonstrating the atom bomb to the Japanese leadership in WW2 instead of actually bombing them?

Traitors...

People who equate going against interests of their president as the same thing as going against the interests of their country are basically begging to live under a dictatorship.

Senator Lindsey O. Graham agreed to hear Rudolph W. Giuliani out. In a January 2nd meeting arranged by Mark Meadows, the White House chief of staff, and held in his West Wing office, the South Carolina Republican met with Giuliani and his legal team to learn about findings they said could hand Trump a second term.

The book, Peril, describes parallel efforts by the South Carolina Republican and his conservative colleague from Utah, Senator Mike Lee, to personally investigate the president's claims of voter fraud as the lawmakers prepared to certify Joe Biden's victory on January 6th.

Graham and Lee, both of whom ultimately voted to certify the results, took the claims of election fraud seriously enough to get briefed on the details, involve their senior staff, and call state officials throughout the country. But privately, Graham gave the arguments a withering assessment, according to the book, saying they were suitable for "third grade."

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Peril also reveals that Trump is still angry with Republicans who blamed him for the insurrection, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. "This guy called me every single day, pretended to be my best friend, and then, he ****ed me. He's not a good guy," Trump said, according to the book.

While McCarthy has walked back his initial comments after the insurrection, Trump is quoted as dismissing McCarthy's attempts to get back into his good graces. "Kevin came down to kiss my ass and wants my help to win the House back," Trump said, according to the authors.

The book ends with Trump allies speculating about his plans for 2024. Privately, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is quoted as saying, "If he wants to run, then he's going to have to deal with his personality problems. We've got a very damaged team captain."

A conservative lawyer working with Donald Trump's legal team tried to convince Mike Pence that he could overturn the election results on January 6th when Congress counted the Electoral College votes by throwing out electors from seven states, according to the new book Peril from Bob Woodward and Robert Costa.

The scheme put forward by controversial lawyer John Eastman was outlined in a two-page memo obtained by the authors for Peril. The memo, which has not previously been made public, provides new detail showing how Trump and his team tried to persuade Pence to subvert the Constitution and throw out the election results on January 6th.

The centerpiece of the plan conceived by Eastman called for Pence to recognize multiple slates of electors in seven states. In actuality, there was only one slate of electors in all 50 states. The seven slates referenced by Trump's attorney were comprised of Trump cronies and did not have any actual power.

But that was immaterial to Eastman. All Pence needed to do, according to his scheme, was announce that no electors could be appointed from those states—essentially wiping them off the board.

From there, Eastman believed Trump only needed to gain a simple majority of the remaining 454 electoral votes. With the seven states out, Trump—in Eastman's tally—would have prevailed 232:222.

Eastman was also behind Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's failed Supreme Court attempt to overturn the election results in swing states.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
People who equate going against interests of their president as the same thing as going against the interests of their country are basically begging to live under a dictatorship.