Well, Trump does it again! Spills classified information to foreign head of state.

Any bets that NK now has antisubmarine patrols working around the clock?

It is like Trump WANTS to start WW3!

 

I seem to remember the awesome and efficient US military is quite capable of shooting airliners out of the sky with no help from terrorists. Here's another classy US president:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/...-Apologize-Iran-Flight-665-Shot-Down-290-Dead

 

So how do you know the contents of this 'secret memorandum'?

 

Others see it differently and think Obama/Hillary left Stevens and the others hanging out to dry-

 

You know, ...
When bad things happen, you always first kill the one who is going to report about these bad things ... not the one who caused the bad things!

 

This is tabloid crap. In August Amb Stevens refused additional security for a couple of reasons.. There was NO US Consulate in Benghazi, no diplomatic mission , no consular officers and no Marine Guard... and because or their activities at the Annex they wanted to keep a low profile.

 

But you do let ISIL do harm: You seem rather poised to eliminate the ones that fights them like Assad, Iran, Hizbollah.

Looks like complicity to me.

 

In spite of being reasonably well-informed, I never heard of such a story. Sounds like fringe to me.

I believe thare's a fine line between taking what the media say with caution, and saying that all they ever print are lies. Without medias you live in pretty mucg a totalitarian world.

Left like right, we do know that occidental medias, especially US ones (IMO UK's are worse but the British somehow seem more light-hearted about it) are favoring ratings and money over professionalism - but as we live in a post-capitalistic world, we are ready to accept it, and set our minds to be more critical knowing that fact. But to now claim that the Press is the ennemy is IMO cutting off your own arm because your hand hurt.

 

A carrier group isn't stealthy - to the contrary, it is made to be visible. It is big, noisy, emits and receive a lot etc.

Subs, on the other hand...

 

Come on - you make it sound like Obama/Clinton actually wanted these guys dead, simply for evil's sake.

It was just a bad call, a bad decision. There was no criminal intent - they just zigged when they should have zagged. I agree they should be blamed for it, but you guys are actually so zealous about it that it has become an absurd internet meme for illustrating impotent rage instead of incompetence.

In Canada, they talked about the "Benghazigate" for about two consecutive days, then went on to more relevant actualities. Exactly the place it deserved.

 

Uhh... The press here always slants Left, and they are simply out of their minds when it comes to Trump. They thought they were really dogging Trump by giving him all the free coverage they did in the Primaries, figuring that he would damage the eventual GOP nominee, who would then go on to lose to their favored anointed, The Generally Drunken and always Crooked, Hillary.

But then Trump won. So then they decided they could destroy him as he went on to lose to "Secret Server and Always Lying" Hillary. And they have been completely mad ever since about 9pm on election night.

They are only harmful to the extent that they have credibility, and they have been doing a simply marvelous job of making sure that isn't a problem.

So no worries, cheerio!

 

From up north here (we do watch some US news channels from time to time), not only are your news sources more extremist (to the left like to the right), more sensationalistic, but also riddled with un-wanted editorials diguised as news.

The current trend of making our news the way you are tolerating yours is a worrying one. We need some kind of "fair doctrine" act or journalists will become either whores or pimps (depending on how high they position themselves on their iown power scale).

Now that being said, we need them. They are essential.

 

When your enemies fight each other the logical thing to do is stand back and wait.

 

How is Assad/Hizbollah/Iran an enemy?

 

How is a terror organization and a country that loves it's "death to America" an enemy?

 

Which one is a terror organisation? In case it's Hizbollah, it was created to fight Israeli occupation. Their supposed "crimes" were prior to their official formation. Since that time, they are an elected part of Lebanon. The armed group is but a military wing.

(Oh - and there's plenty of terror organisation which are or were alright with the US: Remember the brave Moudjahadins in "Rambo III"? Where are they now... Ha ha ha)

And every country chants "death to America". Even in America they chant "death to America". You are just not liked, what do you want me to say? Do you have statements from these countries' leaders and officials which would indicate they wish harm to America in any concrete way or form, or at least like you do for them?

 

I agree that we should not have armed ISIS with sophisticated military technology such as shoulder launched surface to air missiles. This was not Trump that did this however, that would be the Obama/Hilly team.

 

How to Hide a Task Force
.

 

That's a very interesting article.

 

It comes from a highly reliable website. -> http://www.navweaps.com/

 

Yeah, Guy Derdall's site. It's one of my faves. I started posting first time ever on a board in their "Battleship vs Battleship" forum.

 

The late Gene Slover's (RIP) website is pretty cool. -> http://www.eugeneleeslover.com/GS-USN-PAGE.html

 

Perhaps a government Ministry of Truth? Wait, I remember what the problem is with that, suddenly what is "unfair" and "not to be expressed" are those thoughts and concepts that the government doesn't like. So no, we will stick with our FIRST Amendment, and laugh at the liars who tell lies.

 

If professional orders can't discipline themselves and gain back some respect on their own, yeah, someone ought to do it - and it certainly ain't the free maket.

The time you had such an act your info was finer than it is today. It's anarchy since it's gone.

 

No. Our First Amendment is sufficient to restrain government, and by retraining government, our rights are preserved from encroachment:

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...

You start policing speech and its publication, you start down the road to tyranny. If that is what you want up there, have fun, we have no interest in allowing the government to restrict our speech or press.