Well he's objectively wrong. If someone can rationalize the murder of Osama Bin Laden, it's not automatic that they'd rationalize the killing of everyone else. That should be obvious to anyone.
[Mega] MAGA Super Trump Mega Thread
- Thread starter -SS-
- Start date
Well he's objectively wrong. If someone can rationalize the murder of Osama Bin Laden, it's not automatic that they'd rationalize the killing of everyone else. That should be obvious to anyone.
In the case of Osama Bin Laden, the guy we're talking about, no.
That's not an excuse for you to extrapolate that belief towards everyone else who has NOT killed 3,000 innocent people on 9/11.
Fool
Whiny Bitch
Nope, I said that you're demonstrating the mentality of someone who would not hesitate to murder if you ever obtained power, because you demonstrate authoritarian qualities. Qualities that you did not deny, and have vehemently defended as moralistic. I believe those to be dangerous, and you have admitted, repeatedly and in writing, that you do not care about the circumstance if someone you find objectionable enough is in a position to be killed. I didn't say it, you did. I didn't present the example, you did. I didn't defend murder, you did.
Does circumstance matter triple?
Fool
Whiny Bitch
Why does circumstance not matter with Bin Laden? In other words, what prevents you from applying that same rationale to anyone you like? What are your qualifications for whom circumstance applies to, and who it does not?
Kim Jong Un is the head of state of a sovereign nation.
Osama Bin Laden is not. He was not recognized as a citizen of any nation.
While North Korea is viewed as hostile, and the Korean War has never been formerly resolved, there is an armistice declared between the two Korea's and no provocative action has been taken directly against the United States since 1953.
Osama Bin Laden has taken credit for openly attacking American Military and Civilian interests and was leading an organized militant group who's aim was inflicting direct harm to the United States and its' allies.
If you don't understand the differences between assassinating Kim Jong Un and Osama Bin Laden.... you really do not understand how the world works.
Maybe its a mistake for Trump to negotiate, maybe it'll prove fruitless and a waste of time, this might prove to be Tumps modern day "Peace in our Time" charade... but the Korea War is still unresolved after 65 years... this shit has to end one way or another. 75 million Koreans live under the threat of war with a hair trigger.
Osama Bin Laden is not. He was not recognized as a citizen of any nation.
While North Korea is viewed as hostile, and the Korean War has never been formerly resolved, there is an armistice declared between the two Korea's and no provocative action has been taken directly against the United States since 1953.
Osama Bin Laden has taken credit for openly attacking American Military and Civilian interests and was leading an organized militant group who's aim was inflicting direct harm to the United States and its' allies.
If you don't understand the differences between assassinating Kim Jong Un and Osama Bin Laden.... you really do not understand how the world works.
Maybe its a mistake for Trump to negotiate, maybe it'll prove fruitless and a waste of time, this might prove to be Tumps modern day "Peace in our Time" charade... but the Korea War is still unresolved after 65 years... this shit has to end one way or another. 75 million Koreans live under the threat of war with a hair trigger.
By your logic Lincoln and Washington were authoritarians. After all, they both were responsible for the deaths of thousands of people in order to defend their country.
That's completely false. I never generalized that statement. You did. I said that in terms of killing Osama in the raid that JSOC did on his compound. It was never "someone who did something objectionable". It was osama. I've said this repeatedly and corrected you repeatedly, so at this point you're out of excuses and you're just outright lying.
You're so incredibly dishonest.
Last edited:
Fool
Whiny Bitch
Textbook circumstance switch, right here. Washington and Lincoln were fighting wars, engaged with enemy combatants. If Washington and Lincoln ordered the slaughtering of troops who had surrendered, under the flag of peace, they would be monsters.
You have said you would kill bin laden regardless of whether he surrendered, regardless of circumstance. He is objectionable enough to you to murder on sight, regardless of circumstance. You've said it multiple times. Not just in a war scenario, not just as an enemy combatant, but as a person who has surrendered. You've attempted to rationalize and justify it repeatedly.
So I'll ask you again, I'll give you the out again, just how objectionable must a person be before you're willing to murder them under the flag of peace? Is Bin Laden an exception to you and where do you draw the line between acceptable to murder under the flag of peace and not acceptable under the flag of peace?
Germanistan. At least spell it right.
It's not up to me personally. The order to kill was authorized by bush, and then obama, and I'd assume trump would be cool with it if he wasn't dead already. In this situation I'm just a citizen, so I'd call 911 and let the feds deal with it. It's not up to me.
If I were president, which would be awesome btw, I'd order to kill him. If I were a navy seal in that raid, with orders to kill, I'd shoot him in the face. Which is exactly the two decisions both our actual presidents and actual navy seals made. Nothing I'm saying is different from what actually happened.
The reason you're so desperate to extrapolate my beliefs to everyone else is because my beliefs about bin laden make total sense. Most people want bin laden dead no matter what. You can't argue that point, so you're trying to argue a completely different point with different people.
this is like the 50th time you've answered a scenario that wasn't even asked of you
havax
Super Genius
if you were president, would you have ordered to kill kim jong un or would you have tried to make peace at a peace summit?
