Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'm well aware of the things you mentioned against Obama. That's why I know there's not an equivalence to what has been directed against Trump. His supporters by and large are described as being a facist cult. Trump as president, especially in this term, has achieved many accomplishments for the American people in a sort amount of time.
Cool. Because you seemed to think a lot of that stuff wasn't wackadoodle, and it was. Very much so.
You're right there. President Obama was criticized for quite a lot of stuff he didn't do, and views or beliefs he never had. Trump, on the other hand, is criticized for stuff he's actually done and said.
I've admitted that some of the criticisms are hyperbolic, but they are still based on reality. Trump absolutely has demonstrated authoritarian tendencies, so the charge of his being akin to a fascist are rooted in real actions. A significant number of his supporters are so ardent in their fealty to him that they willingly and repeatedly ignore reality to do so, i.e. believing he's innocent despite being proven guilty of fraud and other crimes on several occasions. What do you call people who are so totally dedicated to a leader they willingly ignore reality like that?
I'd need examples of actual accomplishments. Most, if not all, of the ones usually claimed seem to be backfiring. His tariff plan, for example, has led to increased prices and less jobs. More specifically, his China tariff policy created a problem that he claimed to have solved...but didn't. China, as a direct result of Trump's tariffs, currently trades a lot less with the US than they used to. Be really hard to call any of that an accomplishment.
APPEARS to be being a key word there. Things are not always as they appear ( which is why we have strict laws about what happens when police are not very careful.
How do you know the person does not have someone close to them that overdosed or came close ( happens a good bit as well people are saved every day by Narcan, in fact at this point you can literally buy it from the drug store.
Maybe they feel that it is better to deal with the demand end vs treatment ( which quite frankly I tend to agree with. To be clear I have no issue arresting the big time dealers, but the users and the ones selling small amounts to fund their own habits do not need incarceration ( or if you are going to minimum security incarceration has been shown not to work if it did the drug war would have been over decades ago. instead it has done nothing but get worse and without addressing demand it will keep getting worse and we will keep having people dying. There have been people who have died for lack of those drugs as well and even counties who have gotten quite costly lawsuits for not providing proper medical care during withdraw for newly arrested inmates. Moreover, often times the drug problems start out with needing prescriptions and sometimes still needing them when they are cut off, but the doctors are too scared to over-prescribe them. I have some ideas on that as well but that is not the topic of this thread.
I think the point was A we are NOT the world's police and B without demand supply goes down with demand there will ALWAYS be a supply one way or another, and in fact when you make something illegal ( not saying that hard drugs should be legal but when you make something illegal and there is a black market supply it will always be worse because you do not know what you are getting
According to that would they not have to KNOW they are drug boats not just suspect.
There is really no way to tell that BECAUSE if they are "smart" they would hide the drugs among the fishing gear meaning that really short of searching the boat there is no way to really prove there are no drugs in those boats.
I think their point it we are NOT confirming that we are blowing up things that we think may be that without knowing for CERTAIN. It is not like on land where you may have two buildings one that is a target and one that is not and the one that is not gets destroyed by somewhat accident due to just being close to the target.
so let me asks you this if congress were to try and stop him do you think he would stop?
would that bring your son back? Would that change the fact that your son took the drugs ( and I for the record to not support the idea that addiction is always a choice) still your son would have bought those drugs and how can you prove ( in most cases who sold the drugs anyway?
Even under that though if the president has sixty days and that time has expired then the president no longer has that authority 60 days has come and gone so if he has the authority to do something for up to 60 days and that time is up then he no long has that authority. Kinda of like how if there is an election and the president is either term-limited or loses the election or the governor well from the time the winner is declared until the time they take office the sitting president or government still has the same authority, however the minute the other person is sworn in maybe it is noon on January 20th maybe it is January 1st but whenever it is that person loses all authority over the state/nation whatever else. If I own a house say and I sell that house and say I agree with the new owner that I have 60 days to get out and during that time on may make whatever improvements ECT I wish, however when that time is up I no longer have any authority over or right to that house. If the law says the president can do something without approval for sixty days and that time expires then it would reason that under that law the president needs to either cease the action or get approval
that means that the president will need to stop when that time is up whether he wants to or not or be in violation of the law.
Who have ( for the most part) had some direct role in their death.
Regardless of which Narco needs to be shut down as much as possible.
I think the issue is are we going about it the right way and will it actually be effective in reducing the numbers at least in any meaningful way.
One could ask that regarding combatting all sorts of things.
yes, they could does not mean that the question does not apply in this case.
Well, I trust that the military did their due diligence to get "positive identification" that the vessel and it's cargo met all the criteria necessary according to the laws or armed combat to designate the vessels as legitimate enemy targets. Legally making them no different than a group of ISIS terrorists transporting weapons, money, or drugs to continue their war effort. Note that positive ID on a declared enemy is all that is necessary to use lethal force.
