Real World Event Discussions
A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 15:36
VIEWED: 755368
PAGE 123 of 725
Saturday, May 26, 2018 12:05 AM
Quote:To be clear, Dallas has a City Area of about 386 Sq Miles and an Urban Area of about 1,400 Sq Miles, right?
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Apparently she is basing her theory upon some TV Show set in Colorado. Our Military Strategy has a preference of not fighting War on our own soil - which would lead to certain loss. Tell me, which Foreign Aggitators or Aggressors, or Oceans, border Colorado?"
What the fuck are you trying to say? That Colorado doesn't have a shit-ton of military bases? That all of the US military is stationed oversees? That the constitution doesn't specify the military is for the common defense?
My point, (which you seem to be unable to comprehend) is that the military is ALREADY a large part of the US job-related economy.
If you were to gather all of the military bases and installations in one single place in the US, it would be a city as large as Dallas, exclusively populated by military personnel. Just to reiterate, that Dallas-sized city would be ONLY military personnel. There would be no waitresses, meter-readers, cashiers or stockboys. There would be no Walmarts, no grocery stores, no Chevrons. No landlords or landscapers. It would be a city the size of Dallas, with nobody but the military.
That's how big the military is as an employer.
And just to make the point further, the US military is not the single largest employer in the US - it's the single largest employer in the world.
MarketWatch
https://www.marketwatch.com › The Margin
Jun 17, 2015 - At 3.2 million strong, the U.S. military is the largest employer in the world
SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
In the Marine Corps, 29 Stumps is 931 Sq Miles, or 2,413 Sq Km. Camp Lejuene is 246 Sq Miles, or 640 Sq Km. Camp Pendleton is 506 Sq Km (~194 Sq Miles). Quantico is 86 Sq Miles. MWTC Pickel Meadows is 190 Sq Km (~73 Sq Miles). That sums about 1,530 Sq Miles merely for those 5 Installations. Reportedly, 29 Stumps is larger than every other Marine Corps base combined.
The Marine Corps is considered the smallest of the 4 Services. But Navy might have less land mass. USMC is an amphibious service, so much time is spent at sea.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Saturday, May 26, 2018 1:40 AM
Quote:Other than the 2 mentioned, the rest of these facts seem only disputed by Libtards.
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:Eh? I have always suspected that you are such a believer in the use of lying that long ago you stopped considering it a bad thing. I suspect that you - just like Trump - find truth telling to be a sign of weakness. "You'll never get anywhere telling the truth!"
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Prove it.
The shear number of Trump's lies are so staggering that you would make money in Vegas if you take 1 to 9 odds he's lying every time he speaks.
HINT: You can't.
Maybe you are unable to penetrate his NY style of speaking and are enraptured every time he makes a speech?
Maybe you are just a fan of Russia and love to see him create disruption? I think I know the truth.
How about I post his lies every day for the next week? How about just the last 4 days?
"Sir, should you get a nobel prize?"
"Everyone thinks I should..."
Not really.
"Sadly, I was forced to cancel the summit..."
He wasn't forced.
"Not surprisingly, the GREAT Men & Women of the FBI are starting to speak out against Comey, McCabe and all of the political corruption and poor leadership found within the top ranks of the FBI. Comey was a terrible and corrupt leader who inflicted great pain on the FBI! "
They are? Who? Cites for anything in that statement? 2, 3, 5 lies in that one tweet?
"Clapper has now admitted that there was Spying in my campaign. Large dollars were paid to the Spy, far beyond normal. Starting to look like one of the biggest political scandals in U.S. history. SPYGATE - a terrible thing!"
No he didn't. "largest scandals in US History?" Not so much.
"WITCH HUNT!" that lie never gets old.
"Everybody is with Tomi Lahren, a truly outstanding and respected young woman! "
No.
"John Brennan is panicking. He has disgraced himself, he has disgraced the Country, he has disgraced the entire Intelligence Community. He is the one man who is largely responsible for the destruction of American’s faith in the Intelligence Community..."
No, that would be you.
That's just the last 4 days - there are more in that time fame, just why bother? You will defend *cough* lie about *cough* his chaos style as long as he's in office.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Saturday, May 26, 2018 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
GSTRING, here's the thing: A "lie" is when people say something that they know to be untrue. In order to know whether someone is lying, you have to know what THEY think is true and what THEY think is false. Since we can't crawl into Trump's mind, we don't know what HE thinks is fact and what isn't. We would need a statement of intent ...Oh, I just said that to get the press/ Democrats/ deep state off my back.
It was the same argument with GWB and Iraq's so-called WMD. I could demonstrate morning, noon, and night that GWB was wrong, wrong, wrong. But, was he lying? I don't know. I'm not sure that HE had the mental capacity to sustain a lie over such a long term. Maybe everyone else ... Cheney, Rice, Tenet, Rumsfeld ... maybe THEY lied to GWB and he believed them. I was left with the choice that either GWB lied, or else he was fatally incompetent. (Fatal for our troops and for a huge number of Iraqis, that is.) But in the end, I don't think I could "prove" that he lied unless someone published a formerly secret diary where GWB admitted to lying.
So I'm not about to try and prove that Trump "lied" or "didn't lie" with each his statements. Instead, we can discuss whether or not he was right or wrong. Some of his statements that YOU deem to be a "lie" I think were actually correct.
That's a very popular tactic used by people who lie, a bit like: "I was joking." I think you just are not familiar with sales people or Trump in particular. I know their schpiel backwards and forwards. "Never admit a wrong..." "Never ask a question that has a "no" answer..." On and on. It's a fascinating and exceptionally slimey business. No, I wasn't a sales person - save your "humor."
Lying is like eating a Big Mac for Trump - he never had much of a social filter, and now that he's the most powerful man on earth, his ego knows no bounds, few rules apply.
He is purposely overstating for effect. Just listen to him, he uses the "every blank" expression constantly. "Everyone is horrified by what the FBI is doing."
Here's more - over statement (lying) for effect - you have to wonder if he's a bit drunk in this clip:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4731522/factual-errors
You have to watch the video there ^
Error #1: The $700B defense budget for FY18 is not the largest ever. It was larger under the Obama administration: $710B in FY11 and $714B in FY10. And that's without adjusting for inflation!
Error #2: The number of ships in the Navy today is not the smallest since the end of WWI. We have 283 ships today, and in 2007 (Bush administration) we had 279.
Error #3: The Navy will not get to 355 ships "very soon." The Navy's 30-year plan says it will not get to that level until after 2050, but it could possibly be accelerated to the 2030s. Either way, it's not very soon.
Error #4: Getting to 355 ships is not an increase of "a couple of hundred" ships. Here's the math: 355 - 283 = 72
Error #5: The 355-ship fleet has not yet been "approved." The ships have not all been authorized yet, and Congress appropriates the money one year at a time.
Error #6: This year's military pay raise is not the first in ten years. There were pay raises in each of the past ten years, & some were higher than this year's raise.
FY09: 3.9%
FY10: 3.4%
FY11: 1.4%
FY12: 1.6%
FY13: 1.7%
FY14: 1.0%
FY15: 1.0%
FY16: 1.3%
FY17: 2.1%
FY18: 2.4%
I believe these comments:
"These lies are told purposefully - to be repeated on Fox etc and to become "reality" for the masses."
"That's Trumps main MO - tell so many lies we can't keep up."
"That's a debating technique, called the Gish Gallop."
I confess I didn't know there was an actual phrase for it:
https://en.wik
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Saturday, May 26, 2018 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Statements which contain universally-inclusive (or exclusive) terms like "everyone", "nobody", "always", and "never" are categorically suspect. We don't even know if the "laws of physics" apply universally, much less an opinion.
Huh? What sort of BS is that????
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 1:45 AM
Quote:Deliberately lying requires a big social filter. If you just blurt out whatever pops into your head at the moment, it will be very difficult to lie. So by your own opinion, Trump is constitutionally incapable of lying consistently. Correct?
That's a very popular tactic used by people who lie, a bit like: "I was joking." I think you just are not familiar with sales people or Trump in particular. I know their schpiel backwards and forwards. "Never admit a wrong..." "Never ask a question that has a "no" answer..." On and on. It's a fascinating and exceptionally slimey business. No, I wasn't a sales person - save your "humor."
Lying is like eating a Big Mac for Trump - he never had much of a social filter
What you transcribed is a bunch of factually incorrect statements. Whether they were deliberate, inexact, or uninformed is I suppose a matter for discussion. Since people constantly accuse Trump of not knowing the details of how the government works or what's in the budget, some of it might be sheer carelessness. It's a point I find useless to argue.
Quote:
Statements which contain universally-inclusive (or exclusive) terms like "everyone", "nobody", "always", and "never" are categorically suspect. We don't even know if the "laws of physics" apply universally, much less an opinion. SIGNY
Huh? What sort of BS is that????- GSTRING
It's not. JSF asked which of Trump's statements were inaccurate, and those were the ones I can say were clearly incorrect. His other statements were mixtures of accuracies, potential accuracies, and inaccuracies, and each one would require debating the three or four points in each statement to determine how accurate each one was. Not a debate I felt like doing, and if I did you would simply say I was posting too many words!
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
As long as you insist that everything is the Republicans'/ Democrats' fault, then you fail to grasp the REAL problem with American politics.
America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 5:52 AM
"I see no benefit to increasing that power."
NOT increasing!!! NOT INCREASING. NOT INCREASING!! NOT INCREASING!!
I had only 3 things I said would change
1) no overseas wars
2) public works types assignments
3) job training
If those are the ONLY things that change, what does that mean for everything else?
EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME.
My god, but you are dense.
SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 7:15 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"I see no benefit to increasing that power."
NOT increasing!!! NOT INCREASING. NOT INCREASING!! NOT INCREASING!!
I had only 3 things I said would change
1) no overseas wars
2) public works types assignments
3) job training
If those are the ONLY things that change, what does that mean for everything else?
EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME.
My god, but you are dense.
I don't care what you think would or wouldn't happen Kiki.
The power would increase. They're not going to ask you for permission first.
BAD IDEA. BAD IDEA. BAD IDEA!!!!
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 8:41 AM
Well jack - let me know when someone makes you god, and I can believe everything you claim.
Otherwise, it's CLEARLY evident you have no argument besides your knee JERK reaction.
SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 9:09 AM
Signy, honestly - I'm not about to write a treatise on foreign military justice.
But in case you're wondering - military personnel are accountable to the US military code, not to civilian law enforcement.
Is off-base conduct covered by military law?
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) specifically requires active duty personnel to follow all applicable rules of military conduct, whether on or off duty, or on or off base. Furlough, a temporary leave of absence from the military, does not change this rule.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice and Off-Base Conduct
The UCMJ is federal law and as such, is not enforced by civilian law enforcement. The UCMJ is instead enforced by federal officers and federal military courts. This has practical implications for enforcement, especially because local law enforcement may not be aware of certain proscriptions on military life. Further, local police have no direct legal authority for enforcing breaches of the UCMJ.
Many crimes under the UCMJ such as murder, rape or robbery, are defined the same way as they are in a civilian court. If a solider commits a crime off-base, and is caught by local law enforcement, the solider will still be under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ. The soldier will be tried for their crime in the military courts.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice and Local Law Enforcement
The military justice system also enforces crimes under the UCMJ that are outside the realm of the civilian courts. However, this does not mean that local law enforcement is required to enforce these UCMJ provisions when a soldier is off-base. For example, the UCMJ prohibits certain adulterous conduct by active military members. This means that if an active military member is caught engaging in adulterous conduct, even if they are off-base, they may be still be subject to military law.
If an off-base soldier engages in adulterous conduct, local law enforcement does not have the responsibility of charging the solider with the breach of the UCMJ. Law enforcement may inform the military that the off-base solider breached the UCMJ, however, they are not obligated to. Further, civilian agencies may have jurisdiction over some off-base conduct that they are not required to inform the military of. Domestic violence incidents are an example of this type of conduct.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice and Conduct Overseas
The UCMJ is also enforced on off-duty soldiers overseas. However, military law enforcement agreements are negotiated between the base and the host nation, and therefore vary. These agreements are designed to keep jurisdiction for off-base infractions within Department of Defense jurisdiction.
SECOND is a troll because it constantly misrepresents what people post, fails to address their actual positions, and resorts to personal attacks when its brain isn't working (which is most of the time).
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, May 27, 2018 10:26 AM
Quote:Are you stupid? Or just tryi
Originally posted by captaincrunch:Quote:That's a very popular tactic used by people who lie, a bit like: "I was joking." I think you just are not familiar with sales people or Trump in particular. I know their schpiel backwards and forwards. "Never admit a wrong..." "Never ask a question that has a "no" answer..." On and on. It's a fascinating and exceptionally slimey business. No, I wasn't a sales person - save your "humor."
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
GSTRING, here's the thing: A "lie" is when people say something that they know to be untrue. In order to know whether someone is lying, you have to know what THEY think is true and what THEY think is false. Since we can't crawl into Trump's mind, we don't know what HE thinks is fact and what isn't. We would need a statement of intent ...Oh, I just said that to get the press/ Democrats/ deep state off my back.
It was the same argument with GWB and Iraq's so-called WMD. I could demonstrate morning, noon, and night that GWB was wrong, wrong, wrong. But, was he lying? I don't know. I'm not sure that HE had the mental capacity to sustain a lie over such a long term. Maybe everyone else ... Cheney, Rice, Tenet, Rumsfeld ... maybe THEY lied to GWB and he believed them. I was left with the choice that either GWB lied, or else he was fatally incompetent. (Fatal for our troops and for a huge number of Iraqis, that is.) But in the end, I don't think I could "prove" that he lied unless someone published a formerly secret diary where GWB admitted to lying.
So I'm not about to try and prove that Trump "lied" or "didn't lie" with each his statements. Instead, we can discuss whether or not he was right or wrong. Some of his statements that YOU deem to be a "lie" I think were actually correct.
Lying is like eating a Big Mac for Trump - he never had much of a social filter, and now that he's the most powerful man on earth, his ego knows no bounds, few rules apply.
He is purposely overstating for effect. Just listen to him, he uses the "every blank" expression constantly. "Everyone is horrified by what the FBI is doing."
Here's more - over statement (lying) for effect - you have to wonder if he's a bit drunk in this clip:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4731522/factual-errors
You have to watch the video there ^
Error #1: The $700B defense budget for FY18 is not the largest ever. It was larger under the Obama administration: $710B in FY11 and $714B in FY10. And that's without adjusting for inflation!
Error #2: The number of ships in the Navy today is not the smallest since the end of WWI. We have 283 ships today, and in 2007 (Bush administration) we had 279.
Error #3: The Navy will not get to 355 ships "very soon." The Navy's 30-year plan says it will not get to that level until after 2050, but it could possibly be accelerated to the 2030s. Either way, it's not very soon.
Error #4: Getting to 355 ships is not an increase of "a couple of hundred" ships. Here's the math: 355 - 283 = 72
Error #5: The 355-ship fleet has not yet been "approved." The ships have not all been authorized yet, and Congress appropriates the money one year at a time.
Error #6: This year's military pay raise is not the first in ten years. There were pay raises in each of the past ten years, & some were higher than this year's raise.
FY09: 3.9%
FY10: 3.4%
FY11: 1.4%
FY12: 1.6%
FY13: 1.7%
FY14: 1.0%
FY15: 1.0%
FY16: 1.3%
FY17: 2.1%
FY18: 2.4%
I believe these comments:
"These lies are told purposefully - to be repeated on Fox etc and to become "reality" for the masses."
"That's Trumps main MO - tell so many lies we can't keep up."
"That's a debating technique, called the Gish Gallop."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME