Its what he does, next he'll tell you how he just won the argument.
Biden Confuses Macron with Mitterand Who Died in 1996
- Thread starter TomFord1980
- Start date
Because Trump had spent years weakening NATO and so Putin figured they wouldn't push back.
Also, due to domestic issues in Russia that began to become a bigger problem in 2020.
Also, he felt he was making significant progress in squeezing Ukraine without military force with Trump's support, so no need to waste resources.
And, finally, Zelensky had started cracking down on Russian propaganda in Ukraine and said he was going to support the National Defense plan that called for a stronger position on the Crimea situation.
Putin didn't start building up his troops until then.
The situation was just different in 2021 than it had been earlier.
Because North Korea has been expanding their production and have more of them to test now.
They started testing ICBMs under Trump, and have been expanding their tests ever since.
I mean calling names and throwing insults sounds like you're angry. People don't usually do that if they're not.
Have you thought about singing up for anger management sessions?
Trump knows Tim Apple and he also knows that windmills neuter whales and bleach cures covid and John McCain was a loser because he got captured in Nam., but he is a winner because he dodged the draft. COVFEFE to all, right in the pussy !
There is major evidence of a man suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome in this post. TDS is a sign of unconciously being a closet Trump fan.
Asking someone if they're "stupid" is not a normal way to have a civil conversation. That is a sign of weakness and a definite sign that you are uncomfortable defending your position.I didn't name call anyone. I was just being conversational. But you threw a tantrum and took your ball and left in a huff, because you knew you couldn't defend your position, and are now trying to save face.
A distraction.
An attack to draw attention away from your argument.
I'm comfortable enough to defend my argument without having to attack anyone because I know I don't have to. I'm confident in my belief and position and also offered information to back up my words.
That is why the argument is over and that's why you lost.
Do you have an argument?
All I see from you are attacks.
Your posts sound a bit like rump.
Do you have an argument?
All I see is you jumping in/out of posts trolling and deflecting.
Yes, both are old and should step out of the election.
Rump's cognitive decline is way worse but both should step down.
Perfectly conversational to ask if someone is stupid? Seriously?
Are you gaslighting me?
Yes, its worth asking to see if you are actually stupid or just trolling and playing stupid.
With you, its hard to tell most of the time.
That's a core bit of the MAGA and general authoritarian mindset, though.
The idea of countries making deals or of international multi-lateral agreements are a joke and a mistake and stupid.
The State is the Leader and therefore all agreements are personal ones.
Trump and Kim had a deal - therefore it only counts between them.
It was also only a verbal agreement where South Korea agreed to voluntarily suspend testing.
(Yes, Kim ignored his deal with Trump and tested missiles anyway.)
Trump told NATO that if they didn't agree with his terms, he would let Putin invade them.
They did test ICBMs during Trump's tenure.
In fact, they did their first tests of ICBMs after he came into power, and didn't stop until they said they were done with the testing they needed.
Then they rolled out ICBMs in their military parades.
Yes, that's a nation who signs the treaty, not a personal agreement between Trump and Kim.
Or did you not notice the part about the Senate?
No.
The move towards dictatorship/authoritarianism Trump has accelerated will continue without him because that is where the GOP was headed anyway.
You don't think Trump can pull it off himself?
He's going to have to be sort of John the Baptist to some other GOP Jesus who will actually usher it in?
That's interesting.
How many ICBMs did they test during Trump's tenure vs Biden's? I know the answer but I'll wait for yours.
So if the nation signs the treaty why would Trump himself be blamed for the other nation breaking it?
Just like why wouldn't Trump be given credit if they stick to it?
You can't have it both ways.
No he didn't.
He moved them from Northern Syria to Eastern Syria to "protect the oil wells" (and hinted it was to take the oil for the US, which would have been a war crime).
In the end, he had roughly the same number of troops there as he had before.
He threatened Erdogan and was laughed at and ignored.
None before.
Several during.
More after.
It's like North Korea built ICBMs and have been testing them more as they have more and have improved the design and their capability, regardless of who is president.
Stop lying about Trump exiting Syria.
If "there are no troops there now" is your standard, not ending official hostilities, then Trump failed to end any conflicts the US was involved with, correct?
The only person who has actually withdrawn troops completely is Biden.
You're the one who keeps insisting that people breaking treaties is because they think the president is weak.
I don't actually think that's how things work. I'm just pointing out that you can't have it both ways.
If it is all about personal strength and how foreign leaders view Trump or Biden, then the fact people ignored Trump and invaded places he said not to means they thought he was weak if you think that fact pattern means people thought Biden was weak.
They have absolutely tested more ICBMs under Biden.
They have built more and have more newer missiles to test.
They also have important regional reasons to take a more belligerent stance these days, given the hardening of South Korea's position.
Believe it or not "Trump Strong/ Biden Weak" is not actually what's driving any of this.
More claims without substance or proof.
How about this...I stop providing sources of info to back up my claims and do as you do...just provide my own biased opinion.
Would that work better for you?
I think that's a point worth more debate.
MAGA is a cult of personality, its not a general movement towards authoritarianism.
The 'base' is what used to be the target GOP demographic but corralled through a cult of personality.
Look at the way mitch and the other MAGA types attack Haley or Ron D, all based on personality. Its not like the GOP is pushing ads saying 'you need a strong leader who will break the laws for you', the 'bases' is supporting rump as an anti authoritarian figure. The GOP is rump's and its his based on personality. There are no policies, just their trust in his personality.
