The issue isn't necessarily requiring supermajorities for important votes, but the fact that the filibuster has been weaponized as a tool of obstruction.
That is just another symptom of GOP extremism, the primary cause of our government's dysfunction.
That is just another symptom of GOP extremism, the primary cause of our government's dysfunction.
not to beat a dead horse (or revive one) but this pretty much hits on exactly what I was talking about before
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-yemen-raid-agree-to-policy-barack-obama-would-not-do-james-matthis-qassim-al-rimi-a7566861.html
its on top military officials, not trump in this case. and not only that, they were more than happy to pass the blame
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-yemen-raid-agree-to-policy-barack-obama-would-not-do-james-matthis-qassim-al-rimi-a7566861.html
its on top military officials, not trump in this case. and not only that, they were more than happy to pass the blame
Ya, I posted that article a page ago. I'm shocked that Mattis gave the go-ahead for it, he should know better. I think it was a perfect storm: generals that should know better, and a President that didn't.
I'm not sure you can lay the blame only at the feet of only the generals if the piece of intel that gets you to pull the trigger is "Obama wouldn't have done it"
Like that shouldn't be the guiding principle in pulling the trigger on missions.
Like that shouldn't be the guiding principle in pulling the trigger on missions.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI'm not sure you can lay the blame only at the feet of only the generals if the piece of intel that gets you to pull the trigger is "Obama wouldn't have done it"
Like that shouldn't be the guiding principle in pulling the trigger on missions.
Basically this. lol.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI'm not sure you can lay the blame only at the feet of only the generals if the piece of intel that gets you to pull the trigger is "Obama wouldn't have done it"If the article is correct in its presentation - military officials presenting the overall operation with any kind of drapery... then it shows a very fucked up practice and way of thinking. You can't present military action like that. Its wrong for reasons I think are obvious to everyone.
Like that shouldn't be the guiding principle in pulling the trigger on missions.
By reilo Go To PostYa, I posted that article a page ago. I'm shocked that Mattis gave the go-ahead for it, he should know better. I think it was a perfect storm: generals that should know better, and a President that didn't.I think its unfair and a bit generous to say that they should know better. Also, Mattis has been effectively out of the loop for a very long time as well. This is on the people that understood both administrations and tried to get the better of both.
By DY_nasty Go To PostIf the article is correct in its presentation - military officials presenting the overall operation with any kind of drapery… then it shows a very fucked up practice and way of thinking. You can't present military action like that. Its wrong for reasons I think are obvious to everyone.
I don't disagree. If the article is correct though, Trump may have actually seemed cautious until the Obama line triggered his ass. That's as disconcerting as the bad intel IMO.
By reilo Go To PostI guess my question is: if you don't feel confident of the missions success, then why run it?Success is subjective. Some people would consider a mission even happening a success. Some people consider fewer than a dozen civilian casualties a success. That's another topic on whether or not those things are communicated efficiently though.
With as many military issues that there have been in the past, you don't want "just blame trump lol" to be a trend there too.
its pretty concerning that the president can be manipulated into doing anything by telling him the other guy wouldn't allow it
but shouldn't surprise anyone at this point
but shouldn't surprise anyone at this point
By Xpike Go To Postits pretty concerning that the president can be manipulated into doing anything by telling him the other guy wouldn't allow itThis kind of shit could happen to any president is my point. If you have military personnel hitting the CIC with alternative facts because , who's fault is that? How dangerous is that? Don't give everyone involved an out by sitting that on Trump.
but shouldn't surprise anyone at this point
Especially with all of the military mishaps that have occurred over the years. The last thing you want to do is *happily* blame the new guy for what is without question a symptom of decades of bullshit.
By reilo Go To PostI'm honestly more concerned that the likes of Mattis were so gun-ho about it.
Yeah and he was the pick most liberals were OK with.
By reilo Go To PostI'm honestly more concerned that the likes of Mattis were so gun-ho about it.I don't get how it should be a knock against him. Again, he's been out the loop for a long time when it comes to ongoing stuff. You'd like to see a general reevaluation of military operations during administration changes, never happens though. At the very least, you want to believe that military officials aren't using the administration change-over to get things done that would otherwise face different hurdles.
Mattis will be gung-ho about a lot of actionable opportunities. You guys should really check his resume lol.
It's on him cause he should have the right to say "we don't have enough info to proceed".
And that's fine, which is why I said I'm more concerned that Mattis was all about it.
And that's fine, which is why I said I'm more concerned that Mattis was all about it.
By reilo Go To PostIt's on him cause he should have the right to say "we don't have enough info to proceed"."enough info" is subjective too. Like... I hope (know) he's in asses about that. Its just concerning that they would happily blame the CIC instead of properly self correcting and evaluating.
And that's fine, which is why I said I'm more concerned that Mattis was all about it.
It was the first thing they did.
By reilo Go To Postlmao, its so sad. everyone knows they can just use this dude as a puppet to achieve all their shitty goals.
This child is a colossal fucking moron who doesn't even realize he is going to tarnish his name because now everyone knows they can just say "Obama would have/wouldn't have done this" and he's going go to sign off on it out of spite. All that blame is going to lay at his feet. There's no Fuck Bannon or Fuck Mattis protest signs
maybe spend a little less time on twitter and you'll notice you're being played.
Again, politicians, judges, and lobbyists doing shit is one thing - but the military taking part in it is far bigger than "Trump is just an idiot" x 1000.
Twitter is down. I repeat, Twitter is down.
This is a national emergency.
I'm just not comfortable with 55% of the country making up and then passing laws that 45% of the country wants no part in. Filibuster as designed allows the minority to force compromise and moderate laws. The onus is on the people to hold politicians accountable when the system is being taken advantage of, not to get rid of the system.
On the other hand, I'm fine with Harry Reid getting rid of the filibuster for cabinet appointments. A 50-50 split for a cabinet member is literally unheard of, and DeVos will be outta there the first sign of trouble. It's up to our muckrakers to get her out the paint.
This is a national emergency.
By reilo Go To PostWhy? If we lived in a supermajority we'd never get anything passed. Supermajority votes are as much of an obstruction to progressivism as anything. The solution is to vote in better representatives.
I'm just not comfortable with 55% of the country making up and then passing laws that 45% of the country wants no part in. Filibuster as designed allows the minority to force compromise and moderate laws. The onus is on the people to hold politicians accountable when the system is being taken advantage of, not to get rid of the system.
On the other hand, I'm fine with Harry Reid getting rid of the filibuster for cabinet appointments. A 50-50 split for a cabinet member is literally unheard of, and DeVos will be outta there the first sign of trouble. It's up to our muckrakers to get her out the paint.
By DY_nasty Go To PostAgain, politicians, judges, and lobbyists doing shit is one thing - but the military taking part in it is far bigger than "Trump is just an idiot" x 1000.its a big deal but im not sure if its bigger. it means they've been waiting for this opportunity if this was done in like the first week or so, but now they know they can ask for anything they want, just end the question with
Obama wouldn't have done it
and you have a free pass to raid, drone or invade whatever you want.
By RobNBanks Go To Postits a big deal but im not sure if its bigger. it means they've been waiting for this opportunity if this was done in like the first week or so, but now they know they can ask for anything they want, just end the question withNot to be conspiracy breh, but who's to say this is new practice?
Obama wouldn't have done it
and you have a free pass to raid, drone or invade whatever you want.
You got hundreds of dead soldiers under Bush, "Yo Obeezy, check out what these drones can do". It just shows a very, very bad side of the military at the very least. They shouldn't come off like lobbyists.
The way I see is, look at the police and how they behave like kids in a candy/puppy/fireworks shop when the time comes to suit up and break out the toys.
Now imagine many of those same people with access to high grade military gear. There's no way they can help themselves. And that's not even considering the people who are just bloodthirsty warmongers. All of this shit is inevitable.
Now imagine many of those same people with access to high grade military gear. There's no way they can help themselves. And that's not even considering the people who are just bloodthirsty warmongers. All of this shit is inevitable.
By reilo Go To Post
Because Obama wasn't a fucking idiot.....
Yemen is now forbidding us from more ground missions after our fuckups >_>
Strong work by Trump+Mattis.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/world/middleeast/yemen-special-operations-missions.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0
Strong work by Trump+Mattis.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/world/middleeast/yemen-special-operations-missions.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0
By IWMTB19 Go To PostYemen is now forbidding us from more ground missions after our fuckups >_>i thought you liked intervening actions in civil war torn countries
Strong work by Trump+Mattis.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/world/middleeast/yemen-special-operations-missions.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0
By DY_nasty Go To Posti thought you liked intervening actions in civil war torn countriesJeeeeeesus this is disingenuous.
Let's say he does. He probably doesn't like ones that are so disastrous that even a wartorn hellhole like Yemen says "enough."
By KingGondo Go To PostJeeeeeesus this is disingenuous.
Let's say he does. He probably doesn't like ones that are so disastrous that even a wartorn hellhole like Yemen says "enough."
This generally is my opinion!
This is like responding to someone mocking a bridge to nowhere with "OH, but I thought you liked government spending?!?"
imagine fucking up so bad even a war torn hellhole asks you to leave them alone
imagine trump reading the news and going to twitter telling everyone he's still the best president
imagine trump reading the news and going to twitter telling everyone he's still the best president
By KingGondo Go To PostJeeeeeesus this is disingenuous.No, its not. Because boots on ground in war torn countries = dead civilians and soldiers alike. It comes with the territory - inherently, because there's no such thing as a perfect war. To not own that is what's disingenuous.
Let's say he does. He probably doesn't like ones that are so disastrous that even a wartorn hellhole like Yemen says "enough."
As for the civil rights stuff, same thing. Yemen is starving out masses of people. Proxy war or not, mass civil rights issues are occurring there on a regular basis.
There's a middle ground between a rainbows and unicorns version of war and the apparent clusterfuck that happened.
Including Yemen on the travel ban list probably doesn't get them in the mood to cooperate either.
Including Yemen on the travel ban list probably doesn't get them in the mood to cooperate either.
By KingGondo Go To PostThere's a middle ground between a rainbows and unicorns version of war and the apparent clusterfuck that happened.You're talking hindsight and when the smoke clears. If you're for boots on ground solutions, you're also for accepting the worst-case scenarios that go hand in hand with them.
Including Yemen on the travel ban list probably doesn't get them in the mood to cooperate either.
Maybe Trump should have considered the potential risks before he signed off on such a risky mission. But he was preoccupied with choosing the right drapes for the Oval Office or coming up with his next idiotic tweet.
That kind of operational failure should never be *accepted* by a country like ours that is supposed to operate according to the highest standards.
And even if the worst happens, it's up to leadership to eat crow.
Instead, the administration continues to lie and call it a success. Wonder how that plays in Yemen when photos of dead children are all over the media?
That kind of operational failure should never be *accepted* by a country like ours that is supposed to operate according to the highest standards.
And even if the worst happens, it's up to leadership to eat crow.
Instead, the administration continues to lie and call it a success. Wonder how that plays in Yemen when photos of dead children are all over the media?
People will die and disasters will happen when soldiers are put into combat.
But generally operations don't start at dinners with the SoD going "Obama would never have the balls to do this!" and don't end with "You are not allowed back into our country." That's a more extreme disaster.
But generally operations don't start at dinners with the SoD going "Obama would never have the balls to do this!" and don't end with "You are not allowed back into our country." That's a more extreme disaster.
By GQman2121 Go To Post
Absolute evil.
It won't happen, but it would be nice if the MLK jr. Split Second/trap card they always love playing backfires on them.
By KingGondo Go To PostMaybe Trump should have considered the potential risks before he signed off on such a risky mission. But he was preoccupied with choosing the right drapes for the Oval Office or coming up with his next idiotic tweet.That kind of operational failure has accepted bigger failures and will continue to do so. How many lives do you think were lost trying to retrieve Bergdahl or example? I obviously can't expect you guys to recall events in Konar, Khost, Mosul, or Fallujah, but people have died and will continue to die because someone deems the risk/reward acceptable. That person is not always the president. And as you say, the leadership should be eating crow - but they didn't. The very first reports had the military doing something that they rarely if ever do, and that's blame the president.
That kind of operational failure should never be *accepted* by a country like ours that is supposed to operate according to the highest standards.
And even if the worst happens, it's up to leadership to eat crow.
Instead, the administration continues to lie and call it a success. Wonder how that plays in Yemen when photos of dead children are all over the media?
And lets not kid ourselves... Yemen was left a hotmess with dead bodies in the street long before Trump felt inadequate. There's no need to play the 'dead children in the streets' card when its obvious that extremely few people cared until a soldier died. Its been just a few weeks and people are already happily forgetting about Syria too.
You guys are loving placing all of this on Trump. And I get it, its fun, its convenient, and it generally makes you feel good - but the idea that the military is not even facing a hint of scrutiny for running to the press to blame him first before going through any sort of reevaluation on their end means that they're more than happy to scapegoat him and will continue to do in order to cowboy it up. No scrutiny, and there's decades of history worth dragging into the discussion that could be potentially measured against what happened in Yemen. From the drapery of whatever they pushed across the CiC's desk, to how it was handled immediately afterwards - people are letting leadership off the hook.
Because fuck Trump and stuff.
They might not be willing to accept blame, but neither is Trump. He is constitutionally incapable of admitting when he fucked up.
I don't place all of the blame on Trump. But he's in the big chair. The buck stops there, all that stuff.
He might have the respect of the yokels who voted for him but he sure as hell doesn't have the respect of military leaders, the judiciary, or even much of his own staff apparently.
I'll give Trump some benefit of the doubt when he's earned it.
I don't place all of the blame on Trump. But he's in the big chair. The buck stops there, all that stuff.
He might have the respect of the yokels who voted for him but he sure as hell doesn't have the respect of military leaders, the judiciary, or even much of his own staff apparently.
I'll give Trump some benefit of the doubt when he's earned it.
By KingGondo Go To PostThey might not be willing to accept blame, but neither is Trump. He is constitutionally incapable of admitting when he fucked up.The buck doesn't stop there is my point lol. People are making it sound like these things are drawn up, evaluated, and executed all at the same level and that's wholly untrue.
I don't place all of the blame on Trump. But he's in the big chair. The buck stops there, all that stuff.
He might have the respect of the yokels who voted for him but he sure as hell doesn't have the respect of military leaders, the judiciary, or even much of his own staff apparently.
I'll give Trump some benefit of the doubt when he's earned it.
At some point people need to acknowledge how potentially damaging it is to blame Trump for everything. Dude makes an amazing scapegoat. Just point at him and escape all consequence... Don't even think. Just say Trump and walk away lol.
It's all his fault, I'm sorry. He hired the people that brought shit to him, and he ultimately signed off on it. The raid doesn't happen with him saying "slow down, let's take a deeper look" or some shit, but we know that's not how fukbois operate.
By Smokey Go To PostIt's all his fault, I'm sorry. He hired the people that brought shit to him, and he ultimately signed off on it. The raid doesn't happen with him saying "slow down, let's take a deeper look" or some shit, but we know that's not how fukbois operate.He didn't hire the US Military. Please, please allow the US military to get called out every once in a while. Because yeah anyone could say "slow down a minute", but they clearly pushed the envelope then ran when it was time to face some music.
I mean fuck trump but he isnt the one preparing military operations or anything. Obviously he signed off on it but fuck whoever brought it to his desk too.
By DY_nasty Go To PostHe didn't hire the US Military. Please, please allow the US military to get called out every once in a while. Because yeah anyone could say "slow down a minute", but they clearly pushed the envelope then ran when it was time to face some music.
Everybody's accountable, but hes the President. It's like the shit that happened at Wells Fargo with rank and file fleecing folks on fees. The CEO had to go and he did. Trump is the CEO. This fuck is just getting started.
The botched operation was bad but I'm willing to give some leeway since things get messy in armed conflict.
What's truly inexcusable is that the admin calling it a success. Not only is it a blatant lie but we're 2 weeks in and the bar has already been lowered this far? Some truly reprehensible shit is coming down the pike.
What's truly inexcusable is that the admin calling it a success. Not only is it a blatant lie but we're 2 weeks in and the bar has already been lowered this far? Some truly reprehensible shit is coming down the pike.
By Smokey Go To PostEverybody's accountable, but hes the President. It's like the shit that happened at Wells Fargo with rank and file fleecing folks on fees. The CEO had to go and he did. Trump is the CEO. This fuck is just getting started.Man... the military has been the military before Trump showed up. Yal are really trying to act like Trump drew this up himself. We don't have Presidents with military background anymore. All that pomp of how operations should go (Trump) or how Guantanamo is gonna be thing of the past and btw drones are neat (Obama) or how exit strategies can be worked out later (Bush) - there's a common theme here.
Give these guys some credit.
By KingGondo Go To PostThe botched operation was bad but I'm willing to give some leeway since things get messy in armed conflict.Maybe a show of force and casualties within a certain amount are what they deem a success. Who's to say? Like I said before, success is subjective...
What's truly inexcusable is that the admin calling it a success. Not only is it a blatant lie but we're 2 weeks in and the bar has already been lowered this far? Some truly reprehensible shit is coming down the pike.
They missed their primary target, killed a couple dozen civilians (including an 8-year old American girl), and a SEAL was killed.
Please please please explain to me how that could be deemed a success in any universe?
Please please please explain to me how that could be deemed a success in any universe?
By KingGondo Go To PostThey missed their primary target, killed a couple dozen civilians (including an 8-year old American girl), and a SEAL was killed.See, if you brought that level of giveadamn to most military blunders or 'successes' that killed a mass of civilians I'd put you in a for medal myself.
Please please please explain to me how that could be deemed a success in any universe?
Because this shit definitely didn't start last week lol
Just imagine you're one of the Seals that's being deployed on this mission. At what point during the briefing are you like, is it just me, or does this seems kind of fucked? The brainwashing kicks in at some point but I'm sure a few of them were doubting things on that initial chopper ride in.
By KingGondo Go To PostThey missed their primary target, killed a couple dozen civilians (including an 8-year old American girl), and a SEAL was killed.They collected a bunch of data that could lead to future...ops or some shit.
Please please please explain to me how that could be deemed a success in any universe?