Trump Has No Substance ? Check THIS Out !

Today Donald Trump revealed his plan on how he would deal with ISIS. He said point blank, these words >> "They have great money because they have oil," Trump said. "Every place where they have oil I would knock the hell out of them."I would knock out the source of their wealth, the primary sources of their wealth, which is oil," he told MSNBC. "And in order to do that, you would have to put boots on the ground. I would knock the hell out of them, but I'd put a ring around it and I'd take the oil for our country."

So Trump has now taken a position that no their candidate has taken, that I know of (except Lindsey Graham). I guess that puts a stop to all those who said Trump never says what he wants to do. I remember a while back in 2011, when the troops were pulled out of Iraq, Trumps said that we should at least have gotten the oil. Looks now now we may do just that.

Lastly, for all those who don't keep up, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll on this subject, 62 % of Americans said they favored sending US ground troops to Iraq to fight ISIS.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-tru...ound-it-2015-8

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/isi.../04/id/628149/

 

I particularly loved the "I'd take the oil for our country" line.

Seems he has no trouble being an "armed robber".

I seem to recall in the build up to Iraq2, the neo-cons were claiming that Iraqi oil was going to pay for the "off the books" cost of the war.

And despite that rather obvious lie (in hindsight of course), Trump doubles down and rolls it out again. Not enough money for school lunches but more than enough money to go to war yet again. Something is truly askew in the world of "fiscal conservatism" as espoused by the warmongering crowd.

 

Hahahaha... your memory is that neocons claimed we were going to war for the oil? Lmao... that is not my memory. An armed robber? Are the cops armed robbers when they confiscate the jet you are transporting cocaine in?

 

Which politician has substance? None of them.

 

When you stop the wholesale slaughter and mass rapes of ISIS, you are not an armed robber, you are a nation stopping wholesale slaughter and mass rapes by ISIS.

 

'Taking the oil' would be a war crime.

 

Huh? "I'd take the oil for our country" isn't expressing the intent to by force of arms take property that doesn't belong to him?

Nice meaningless deflection tho.

 

No, the neo cons went to great lengths to manufacture reasons why their war in Iraq was not for oil, even though the entire planet (except maybe the Fox/talk radio crowd) understood otherwise.

So, we spent 10 years ,1.5 trillion, and wound up withdrawing and leaving the place in chaos, and Donald's idea is to do it again?????????

Maybe he ought to keep his "big ideas" to himself.

 

I didn't say going to war for oil, I said they claimed that Iraqi oil would pay for the war. But here's a reminder of the idiotic expectations of the bush/cheney administration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uFjr0Vr1ZY

Your analogy is fallacious, but hey, I totally understand that it works for you.

 

ISIS stole the oil and is using it suport their campaign of murder rape and immolation. Of course I would be fine with the US killing ISIS and taking the oil to pay the costs of the effort of doing the world the service of putting all of ISIS under the sand. You have a fairly strange set of ethics if you find that to be an unethical use of US power.

 

Hmm hillary supported it, and now the left will support her.

 

At first glance it doesn't sound like a bad idea. We would be taking valuable resources from a violent group that is using those resources to finance, murder, rape, and terror. I ultimately don't think it's a good idea though.

We would be taking those resources away from a terror organization, yes. But those resources aren't their's in the first place. They stole those resources from another government. I would look at it as not taking the oil from ISIS, but from any governments it was originally stolen from. On top of that, I'm tired of sending our soldiers to die in the Middle East.

I like Rand Paul's solution the most. How about we simply stop providing arms to ISIS?

 

So... what oil did we get again?

 

Awesome. Now you just need to go around and pick-up those 62% that favor sending ground troops to Iraq...and send them to Iraq. Only seems fair. The Donald should personally lead them into battle.

 

Why do you assert that the analogy is fallacious?
Your videos only mention of oil was that emergency generators helped increase Iraqi production... nobody was claiming that the oil was paying for our participation. There was nothing idiotic there, except for Biden demanding that they predict the future commitments of other countries in order to determine how much money they will ask for next year.

 

So because Bush and Obama didn't get any oil from Iraq, that means Trump won't either ? I've always said liberals are the lousiest liars on the block. And "robber". EARTH TO JONSA; that oil has already been paid for in thousands of US troops' lives. Wake up.

Are you nuts ? To the victor, go the spoils.

 

It belongs to us. Only a complete idiot could fail to see that. Sheeeesh.

And your big idea is to do nothing, and let ISIS buy nukes and kill us all, and continue slaughtering Christians ? Get a brain.

 

VERY strange indeed. One wonders how such thinking could even exist. Sheeeesh.

 

Except the oil contracts were sold to Canada, and whoever god knows else, except the United States. Trump is actually stating he'd GO for it. The Neo-cons were cowards who were incapable of planning a true military invasion and conquest. You wouldn't confuse them for Genghis Kahn.

 

Trump's solution is beneath America because it fails to distinguish us from the villain. That's why he's an idiot and will never win.

For America to be a leader it must behave as such. Even if you explain that to Trump, he wouldn't understand it.

 

Interesting how you find fault with taking oil from Iraq, as if we haven't paid anything for it, and in the very next sentence you mention our soldiers dying over there. Are you really missing the connection ?

 

Trump understands the reality that oil moves the world. Good for him.

 

Plenty of military are ANXIOUS to fight ISIS. I'm going to Iraq tomorrow, and Afghanistan right after that, as an advisor to Army Special Forces. I'll be off the internet for 2 months, starting today. These are my last posts until October.

 

Taking oil from ISIS is not behaving like a "villain". It is behaving like a VICTOR in war, and a hero for liberating the areas from a genocidal, murderous menace.
Where do you get the idea that taking oil from ISIS is somehow a bad thing ? Strange way of thinking, Very strange. We should take EVERYTHING ISIS has, with oil being just one of the rewards. We should also take all the money they have stashed away in banks, and take back all the military equipment they stole from the Iraqis which came from us. Lastly, we should execute every last one of these fiends. 100% EXTERMINATION.

 

Trump didn't say "I would take the oil from ISIS." He said, "I'd take the oil for our country."

But I don't expect less from you, as you advocate that we "execute every last one of these fiends" and commit "100% EXTERMINATION." History has recorded those before us with the same view. YOU are indistinguishable from the villain.

"100% EXTERMINATION" is not leadership.

"100% EXTERMINATION" is not American.