Trump Keeps Promise On Making America Great Gain: Pardons Multiple Army War Criminals

[burtlancast]

Seems he was acquitted on everything but posing with a corpse. But the reason a nation-state would 'go easy' on someone like this in their elite military units is totally strategic. When your military conflicts are largely asymmetrical / guerrilla (as with the USA), and your enemy engages in the tactics associated with that (typically attacks on non-military targets), then you quite benefit in letting your guerrilla enemies know that you have a few very violent sociopaths floating around your advance units and you aren't afraid to let them off the leash from time to time to put a measure of fear in them. You don't want your rank-and-file military members acting like this because of the scale, optics, and detriment to organized soldiering, but making some ISIS member aware that being slowing gutted and bled out by a member of a covert advance unit having a 'bad day' is a real possibility is good psychological warfare.

So, because Trump condones these atrocities, it constitutes a good strategic military move ?

Would you say likewise if you were serving in the same military area, and the population knew your units harbor psychopaths like Gallagher ?

What do you suppose would happen to you or fellow men should they be captured by the local forces?

As opposed to both camp respecting war conventions ?

....

 

[yerrag]

Yes it is.

He's the one supposed to be in charge.

If it was anyone else, going very much out of their way condoning the same atrocities,i would have posted the same.

The politics of the lesser evil has people dancing on a string like puppets.

Who's condoning the atrocities? You're conflating things. What does congratulating a soldier for being acquitted have to do with condoning atrocities?

Yet I believe you on your word that you would make the same judgment if Hillary or Obama made the same gesture as Trump did. Because the optics look good, and you're all about the optics. Never mind that the court acquitted him. It's all in the optics.

I imagine the world would be a better place if we all preened as we virtue-signal as predictably.

p.s. I really don't imagine Hillary or Obama would congratulate Gallagher on being acquitted. They have to protect their image, as image is all they have to go with.

 

[Tristan Loscha]

Oh cool. "tax cuts for billionaires" really says it all for you. If you were just the casual apolitical type you would not have defended Burt but your liberal Dem outrage raise its head. Mentioning Trump in a negative way is not apolitical? Maybe your hormones are off? Suggest you cut back on your hormones.

Yeah,im a raging liberal,now what.
My hormones are just fine,im a tense dude,not some stoner.

Also,On topic,Gallagher was acquitted,but the Crimes happened,just a random dude who got at-random immunity granted,said it was him,not Gallagga,so Gallagher was acquitted,and the random dude let loose,
immunity,lol.
This is just an example of the metaphor of a Kangaroo-Court.

 

[thomas00]

people who have unwavering faith in the government and the legal system in regards to this verdict should take a look at the sentences handed out for the My Lai perpertrators

 

[Tristan Loscha]

Warfare,if it is not a surgical strike,is always a crime.
It is the process of premeditated manslaughter,murder.

 

[LUH 3417]

Who's condoning the atrocities? You're conflating things. What does congratulating a soldier for being acquitted have to do with condoning atrocities?

Yet I believe you on your word that you would make the same judgment if Hillary or Obama made the same gesture as Trump did. Because the optics look good, and you're all about the optics. Never mind that the court acquitted him. It's all in the optics.

I imagine the world would be a better place if we all preened as we virtue-signal as predictably.

p.s. I really don't imagine Hillary or Obama would congratulate Gallagher on being acquitted. They have to protect their image, as image is all they have to go with.

Trump has to protect his imagine to and remind all the mothers at home whose young sons they will never see again why they wake up every morning and take their pills and even bother to try to live the day. He has to be the war dad.

 

[yerrag]

Trump has to protect his imagine to and remind all the mothers at home whose young sons they will never see again why they wake up every morning and take their pills and even bother to try to live the day. He has to be the war dad.

Good point. He could be the dad who believes his child or the dad who disowns his own child. If found guilty, and Trump still supports Gallagher, it would be bad. When acquitted, Trump will be castigated by CNN and the entire deep state for not supporting Gallagher. Either way, Trump could not do anything right.

 

[burtlancast]

people who have unwavering faith in the government and the legal system in regards to this verdict should take a look at the sentences handed out for the My Lai perpertrators

Wow.

+500 civilians killed and raped, children and infants included, and only one lieutenant found guilty of killing no less than 22 villagers punished with a ridiculous 3.5 years of house arrest.

Now i understand better why Trump was so eager to involve himself in these atrocities.

 

[yerrag]

Wow.

+500 civilians killed and raped, and only one lieutenant found guilty with a punishment of 3.5 years of house arrest.

Now i understand better why Trump was so eager to involve himself in these atrocities.

A lot of guilt by association employed here. Bless Hillary. Bless Obama - the Nobel Peace Prize is all that matters.

 

[thomas00]

And for you:

HillBillary = Good
Trump = Bad?

I think they are both bad. From the perspective of wealthy people who only care about money they are both pretty good.


What Trump's supporters think of Trump and Clinton are simply images crafted by his campaign team and various media outlets. They have nothing to do with his actual policies.


Some people still believe he cares about poor people and wants to stop war with Russia.

 

[DrJ]

So, because Trump condones these atrocities, it constitutes a good strategic military move ?

The court did not find that any atrocities had occurred. It's bizarre how you are fixated on Trump in this. If it's as you say and atrocities occurred, then your issue would be with the US Navy and its legal system which decided otherwise, would it not? Note it's not a military 'move'. It's strategic posturing aimed at terrorist groups.

Would you say likewise if you were serving in the same military area, and the population knew your units harbor psychopaths like Gallagher ?

I'm pointing out a rationally considered stance of a nation-state engaged against brutal guerrilla elements and not laying down my moral judgement on the issue. In this case the population was the (mostly Shia) Iraqi's, and the belligerents had substantial foreign fighters and were of Sunni vintage. Sunnis hate Shias and they are constantly fighting each other. I expect the native Shia's wanted the Sunni/ISIS fighters out of the area.

What do you suppose would happen to you or fellow men should they be captured by the local forces?

Which local forces? I think the Shia would treat them well and return them; same goes for the Kurds. It was clear that ISIS would commit all sorts of war crimes against their war prisoners.

As opposed to both camp respecting war conventions ?

There's not 2 camps and one camp (ISIS) was clearly violating war conventions. Killing and raping Yazidis, terrorist attacks on civilian targets, keeping slaves, killing the families of known Iraqi army members and translators, etc. This isn't like WW2 where all belligerents are nation states who still exist after the war and can be dealt with in war crime tribunals when the war is over.

 

[yerrag]

What Trump's supporters think of Trump and Clinton are simply images crafted by his campaign team and various media outlets. They have nothing to do with his actual policies.

What image of Trump is crafted with Trump being himself? You mean he isn't really a showboat but a shy introverted and curcumspective recluse? And do you believe yourself that what Clinton is is just a malicious slander by Trump's campaign team? Talk about living under a rock.

Some people still believe he cares about poor people and wants to stop war with Russia.

Some people also believe Trump wants to use the presidency to further enrich himself and wants war with Russia.

 

[Tristan Loscha]

The court did not find that any atrocities had occurred. It's bizarre how you are fixated on Trump in this. If it's as you say and atrocities occurred, then your issue would be with the US Navy and its legal system which decided otherwise, would it not? Note it's not a military 'move'. It's strategic posturing aimed at terrorist groups.


I'm pointing out a rationally considered stance of a nation-state engaged against brutal guerrilla elements and not laying down my moral judgement on the issue. In this case the population was the (mostly Shia) Iraqi's, and the belligerents had substantial foreign fighters and were of Sunni vintage. Sunnis hate Shias and they are constantly fighting each other. I expect the native Shia's wanted the Sunni/ISIS fighters out of the area.


Which local forces? I think the Shia would treat them well and return them; same goes for the Kurds. It was clear that ISIS would commit all sorts of war crimes against their war prisoners.


There's not 2 camps and one camp (ISIS) was clearly violating war conventions. Killing and raping Yazidis, terrorist attacks on civilian targets, keeping slaves, killing the families of known Iraqi army members and translators, etc. This isn't like WW2 where all belligerents are nation states who still exist after the war and can be dealt with in war crime tribunals when the war is over.

Now thats what i call a mouthful!

"military move" and "strategic posturing" sounds both like something Posers would do.
All this dissociated Tacticool-speak.
What gives?

 

[burtlancast]

The court did not find that any atrocities had occurred.

Because they learned from the My Lai fiasco that it's better to avoid finding people guilty than finding them guilty then letting them get away with a slap on the wrist.
PR machine in full force.

I'm pointing out a rationally considered stance of a nation-state engaged against brutal guerrilla elements and not laying down my moral judgement on the issue.

What moral judgement ?

I asked you a very simple question: would you feel comfortable as a soldier to serve in an area where local population knows American forces are actively targeting civilians ?

There's not 2 camps and one camp (ISIS) was clearly violating war conventions. Killing and raping Yazidis, terrorist attacks on civilian targets, keeping slaves, killing the families of known Iraqi army members and translators, etc.

And thus retaliating with these same atrocities in the American side will make the situation somehow better ?

 

[Hildy]

Yes it is.

He's the one supposed to be in charge.

If it was anyone else, going very much out of their way condoning the same atrocities,i would have posted the same.

The politics of the lesser evil has people dancing on a string like puppets.

By appearance, I'm STILL amazed that the ones responding here don't get this. That's not a judgment but a genuine reaction/observation on my part. I can understand why some would take personal offense, but that's not my intention. I think most are looking at the minutiae - falling into that black/white paradigm, instead of seeing the bigger picture.

This, as you DO see, is more than "just" republican, or "just" democrat, or just the political two party system- and it's not the good guys or the bad guys because they are all, the good and the bad, on the same team, working for the same system or "family" if you will. And it's a very very big family. Or Machine.
But sadly most will not see this because they are, as I've said before, they are looking at things from a cognitively dissonant perspective.
Until they are aware of the elephant in the room, acknowledge the elephant in the room and go the extra mile to ascertain WHY the elephant is in the room, they will not see or "get" it. Unfortunately.

 

[Tristan Loscha]

Also,the court did not dismiss the alleged crimes perpetrated.
It was just someone else,who got very fortunate complete immunity.
It was me! he probably yelled.

 

[Pablo Cruise]

Can we close this topic?

And for you:

HillBillary = Good
Trump = Bad?

And how would people see your self-aggrandizing attitude?

Someone taped that conversation because it represnted what? What a waste. Got to impeach Trump for being humorless I suppose....

Anyway, Trump is my man. I will take a social oddball over any smiling dude who is selling out this country for the monetary gain, ie, Biden and son.

 

[jzeno]

A little off topic--All you ever get on these Trump posts is Trump Derangement Syndrome on the one side and Trump supporters on the other. I don't see the point.

I do like seeing all the Trump love on here, though. More than enough liberals everywhere in the world so any glimmer of Trump love is nice to see. I don't mind hearing the both sides but as long as I hear both sides equally represented and usually everywhere else it's Trump hunting season 24/7 and I never get the other side of the story. So I'm glad some pipe up and defend the other side every now and again.

 

[Lone Bunman]

The only enemy was Churchill's creditors.

 

[thomas00]

What image of Trump is crafted with Trump being himself? You mean he isn't really a showboat but a shy introverted and curcumspective recluse? And do you believe yourself that what Clinton is is just a malicious slander by Trump's campaign team? Talk about living under a rock.

In part, the image you appear to have fallen for hook, line and sink for- that he supposedly isn't fazed by what people think of him when he's obviously as vain as could be and get's obsessive about certain types of criticism, that he is intrinsically righteous and anyone questioning that is just engaging in CNN partisanship and deep state conspiracy. That last one is a hoot.

Then there is Trump the crusader against entrenched political corruption and Trump the champion of the poor. People who follow the policies he enacts instead of being entranced by his dog whistles know these two personality traits he supposedly embodies are as fake as his hair and his wife's face.

Some people also believe Trump wants to use the presidency to further enrich himself and wants war with Russia.

His policies certainly indicate a fair a bit of the former.