Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

In a best case scenario- NK agrees to dismantle their nuclear program with verification and complete access to their stockpile. Will it happen? No way, Kim Jong Un will never give that up, willingly.

A more realistic scenario is that NK agrees to halt future nuclear weapons testing & missile launches- I think that is doable & that would be "yuuuge." In return, Trump can agree to reduce our American military presence in South Korea- but only if NK complies with their concessions with verification, first. I expect if the summit goes well, their will be future talks and perhaps a second summit to further the process. Either scenario is a win/win for Trump.

The worst case scenario is the summit being cut short with either Kim Jong Un or Trump leaving the talks early without any new agreements put into play.

As for sanctions, they remain in place. Trump doesn't budge on them until NK agrees & follows through to our conditions.

DiscoGary wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Gary, that does not reflect how most liberals or Americans feel. I did not wish for thousands to die in Iraq and Afghanistan to make Bush look bad and unsuccessful. I don't know anyone who wishes for a catastrophe just because they don't like the other side. Where do you draw that sentiment from??? You are stopping to new lows and reaching with that one. But to counter your Bill Maher comment, Trump has publicly wished for a shutdown to hurt Dems and for Russia to weaken his political opponent - is that good for our country?

Bad example. The MSM tried everything they could to make us lose in Iraq and Afghanistan from portraying our soldiers as torturing monsters to undermining our intelligence conclusions to the nightly body count numbers. Every report was designed to depress the morale of the US and our military and to downplay any successes we had - which directly encouraged our enemies and led to the deaths of Americans and prolonged the suffering of everyone over there.

So yes. Absolutely yes. The liberal MSM, academia, Democrat leadership, and Harveywood ALL worked against the US just to score political points on GWB and drive his poll numbers down. It was the most shameless inexcusable example of craven political hackery I've ever seen, and much of it bordered on treasonous. So it's not much of a stretch to think that liberals would hope for a Trump fail in NK just to score points on Trump no matter what the consequences are. It's no stretch at all.

agip wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Bad example. The MSM tried everything they could to make us lose in Iraq and Afghanistan from portraying our soldiers as torturing monsters to undermining our intelligence conclusions to the nightly body count numbers. Every report was designed to depress the morale of the US and our military and to downplay any successes we had - which directly encouraged our enemies and led to the deaths of Americans and prolonged the suffering of everyone over there.

So yes. Absolutely yes. The liberal MSM, academia, Democrat leadership, and Harveywood ALL worked against the US just to score political points on GWB and drive his poll numbers down. It was the most shameless inexcusable example of craven political hackery I've ever seen, and much of it bordered on treasonous. So it's not much of a stretch to think that liberals would hope for a Trump fail in NK just to score points on Trump no matter what the consequences are. It's no stretch at all.

if you need one example of Gary being a troll, here it is.

The dude lived through Vietnam. And he thinks the media fawning over our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan is worse than that.

Anyone who was an adult during iraq and afghan knows that the media took major steps never never to condemn our soldiers. Politicians and military leadership, sure. That's the job of the free press. And thank the lord for it.

Trollminator wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Just like liberals could not allow Bush's war in Iraq to succeed, they can not allow Trump to make peace with NK.

Gary this is just a phenomenally stupid statement. I served in Iraq and even if I didn’t it was pretty easy to conclude that GWB and the rest of the leadership turned the operation into a complete cluster fvck that had no chance of ending well from the very early stages. As we all witnessed, despite Dems getting on board and committing to the operational and astronomical financial resources that were asked, we not only failed to secure peace in the region but created the giant vacuum that was filled by the masses of enemies we developed during the conflict. It was a failure - nothing short of.

Assuming the pretext for war was ok, he should have stopped up to the point of invasion and having toppled Saddam. Instead of working with the political framework that was already in place to achieve regime change we decided to do the full purge and plunder the region into political and violent turmoil. Even if he decided to GTFO right after killing Saddam and letting them deal with the aftermath on their own the world would have been better off. We all know exactly what the outcome was.

Please don’t preach to anyone on this topic, you sound like a complete imbecile. To assume the war would have gone well based on the strategic decisions that were made and to assume that the Democrats somehow prevented that hypothetical success is just ret@rded.

No you didn’t. wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Gary this is just a phenomenally stupid statement. I served in Iraq and even if I didn’t it was pretty easy to conclude that GWB and the rest of the leadership turned the operation into a complete cluster fvck that had no chance of ending well from the very early stages. As we all witnessed, despite Dems getting on board and committing to the operational and astronomical financial resources that were asked, we not only failed to secure peace in the region but created the giant vacuum that was filled by the masses of enemies we developed during the conflict. It was a failure - nothing short of.

Assuming the pretext for war was ok, he should have stopped up to the point of invasion and having toppled Saddam. Instead of working with the political framework that was already in place to achieve regime change we decided to do the full purge and plunder the region into political and violent turmoil. Even if he decided to GTFO right after killing Saddam and letting them deal with the aftermath on their own the world would have been better off. We all know exactly what the outcome was.

Please don’t preach to anyone on this topic, you sound like a complete imbecile. To assume the war would have gone well based on the strategic decisions that were made and to assume that the Democrats somehow prevented that hypothetical success is just ret@rded.

You didn’t serve.

Trollminator wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Just like liberals could not allow Bush's war in Iraq to succeed, they can not allow Trump to make peace with NK.

Gary this is just a phenomenally stupid statement. I served in Iraq and even if I didn’t it was pretty easy to conclude that GWB and the rest of the leadership turned the operation into a complete cluster fvck that had no chance of ending well from the very early stages. As we all witnessed, despite Dems getting on board and committing to the operational and astronomical financial resources that were asked, we not only failed to secure peace in the region but created the giant vacuum that was filled by the masses of enemies we developed during the conflict. It was a failure - nothing short of.

Assuming the pretext for war was ok, he should have stopped up to the point of invasion and having toppled Saddam. Instead of working with the political framework that was already in place to achieve regime change we decided to do the full purge and plunder the region into political and violent turmoil. Even if he decided to GTFO right after killing Saddam and letting them deal with the aftermath on their own the world would have been better off. We all know exactly what the outcome was.

Please don’t preach to anyone on this topic, you sound like a complete imbecile. To assume the war would have gone well based on the strategic decisions that were made and to assume that the Democrats somehow prevented that hypothetical success is just ret@rded.