Trump just dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb, enjoy.

[TradeTheBeal!]

Korea is really just a playground where American supermen play cowboys and indians.  Ice up those kegs and fire up the grill!

[Springfield]

1 hour ago, gbear said:

Can someone please tell me the difference between using this bomb on them versus using chemical weapons on them? Is the idea to kill them in such a way as to intimidate them with our destructive abilities?  We talk about this as the largest non nuke we have ever used. Isn't that saying we hit them w one step below nuclear ordinance, and can't countries using chemical weapons say we stopped just sort of nukes?

 

What is the moral difference?

 

Well first of all, the difference between this and nuclear bombs is something along the lines of 1,000's of times weaker... than the weakest nuclear bombs.

 

So there's that.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

 

Well first of all, the difference between this and nuclear bombs is something along the lines of 1,000's of times weaker... than the weakest nuclear bombs.

 

So there's that.

 

I think the question is the moral difference in stopping just short of nukes vs using chemical weapons. 

[Springfield]

3 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

I think the question is the moral difference in stopping just short of nukes vs using chemical weapons. 

 

But it's not even close.

 

Little Boy:

 

MOAB:

 

 

I dont really recall anyone in here arguing the moral validity of drone strikes when Obama was in office except for the board's resident Muslim.  Yet here we have a whole thread dedicated to one single bombing.  One.

[twa]

1 hour ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

I think the question is the moral difference in stopping just short of nukes vs using chemical weapons. 

 

The nature of the death....and of course the target.

 

Ya can say dead is dead, but there are worse ways and means

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Not arguing the difference, simply clarifying his question

[Dan T.]

13 minutes ago, Springfield said:

 

I dont really recall anyone in here arguing the moral validity of drone strikes when Obama was in office except for the board's resident Muslim.  Yet here we have a whole thread dedicated to one single bombing.  One.

 

I don't trust Donald Trump's judgement, motive, or critical thinking skills in making a decision to use any weapon.  It's going to be a long 3 years and 9 months.

[Springfield]

2 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Not arguing the difference, simply clarifying his question

 

Gotcha.

 

As far as I'm concerned, this isn't like a nuke or chemical weapons, and I don't think it's close.

Just now, Dan T. said:

 

I don't trust Donald Trump's judgement, motive, or critical thinking skills in making a decision to use any weapon.  It's going to be a long 3 years and 9 months.

 

Which is why I'm not jumping at this.  We will probably have a lot worse on our hands as time goes on.

[visionary]

 

[The Sisko]

You have to wonder with all the fires the Presidunce (LOL LD!) is starting or reacting to, how long it's going to take before our glorious military gets spread thin and a bunch of them end up dying someplace like Somalia because "it's just ______. Two or three Marines with sticks should be able to fight off thousands of them." ...and cue the remake of Black Hawk Down. 

[zoony]

Sounds like the bomb collapsed a cave network filled with isis assholes

 

Trying my best too give a ****.  Yup, still nothing

13 minutes ago, The Sisko said:

You have to wonder with all the fires the Presidunce (LOL LD!) is starting or reacting to, how long it's going to take before our glorious military gets spread thin and a bunch of them end up dying someplace like Somalia because "it's just ______. Two or three Marines with sticks should be able to fight off thousands of them." ...and cue the remake of Black Hawk Down. 

 

Where was all this anger over Obamas drone program?  Does credibility even matter at this point?  Serios question

[Bang]

if it hit ISIS caves and damaged them I'm alright with it. We are at war with them, after all... or at least we are militarily involved in trying to destroy them if it's technically not "war" ..  If it's a DoD recommended strike, I'm good.

If it's just Trump being Trumpy.. I imagine how much damage it actually did to the enemy matters to me more. I don't want him shooting just for the sake of it. And i don't want him shooting unless the DoD and the military in the field thinks it's a good idea. I don't want it to be his idea, so to speak. he's not a general, and he should not be calling the literal shots.

I think if it's a DoD recommended strike, they will hit what they intend.

We didn't call anyone ahead of time, far as I'm aware.

 

~Bang

[TradeTheBeal!]

5 minutes ago, zoony said:

Sounds like the bomb collapsed a cave network filled with isis assholes

 

Trying my best too give a ****.  Yup, still nothing

 

Where was all this anger over Obamas drone program?  Does credibility even matter at this point?  Serios question

 

Serious answer.

 

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1024&bih=672&ei=YRLwWLncFqupjwSomKWICA&q=obama+drone+policy&oq=&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.2.41l3.0.0.0.30818.1.1.0.1.1.0.496.496.4-1.1.0....0...1c..64.mobile-gws-serp..0.1.4.3.qaYetSodBZM

[zoony]

Just now, TryTheBeal! said:

 

Serious answer.

 

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1024&bih=672&ei=YRLwWLncFqupjwSomKWICA&q=obama+drone+policy&oq=&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.2.41l3.0.0.0.30818.1.1.0.1.1.0.496.496.4-1.1.0....0...1c..64.mobile-gws-serp..0.1.4.3.qaYetSodBZM

 

I have no idea what your post means, but im reminded of this

 

https://www.google.com/search?sclient=tablet-gws&site=&source=hp&q=self+loathing+white+liberals&oq=Self+loathing+white&gs_l=tablet-gws.1.1.0l3.3047.9987.0.10515.20.13.0.7.7.0.314.1768.0j12j0j1.13.0....0...1c.1j4.64.tablet-gws..0.19.1683.0..0i131k1.YHQlGh9Nm04

 

[RedskinsFan44]

17 minutes ago, zoony said:

Sounds like the bomb collapsed a cave network filled with isis assholes

 

Trying my best too give a ****.  Yup, still nothing

 

Where was all this anger over Obamas drone program?  Does credibility even matter at this point?  Serios question

Sziko posted about Trump deploying more ground forces in a bunch of countries. It was slightly off topic but it depends on whether you believe this strike with the bomb was about defeating ISIS or about signaling a new hawkish policy to the world.  Obama's reliance.on drones (I believe) was largely to continue attrition of ISIS and Al Quaeda while minimising risk to American servicemen. So comparing the drone program to the use of MOAB missed the point.of his post IMO.

[TradeTheBeal!]

22 minutes ago, zoony said:

 

I have no idea what your post means, but im reminded of this

 

https://www.google.com/search?sclient=tablet-gws&site=&source=hp&q=self+loathing+white+liberals&oq=Self+loathing+white&gs_l=tablet-gws.1.1.0l3.3047.9987.0.10515.20.13.0.7.7.0.314.1768.0j12j0j1.13.0....0...1c.1j4.64.tablet-gws..0.19.1683.0..0i131k1.YHQlGh9Nm04

 

 

Well, you answered your credibility question.

[twa]

1 hour ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Sziko posted about Trump deploying more ground forces in a bunch of countries. It was slightly off topic but it depends on whether you believe this strike with the bomb was about defeating ISIS or about signaling a new hawkish policy to the world.  Obama's reliance.on drones (I believe) was largely to continue attrition of ISIS and Al Quaeda while minimising risk to American servicemen. So comparing the drone program to the use of MOAB missed the point.of his post IMO.

 

Destroying a stronghold along with AQ members with a larger bomb only differs in effectiveness.

Rooting them out and not allowing them safe harbor certainly minimizes risk to our side.

[Spaceman Spiff]

2 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

Pretty sure Hillary and Obama did a great deal of bombing a few years back.  Care to guess what Trumps reactions were?

 

Kinda my point.  It's ok when your guys do it.  When the guy you hate does it, it's a different story.  

 

For the record, not a Trump fan, but I'm also not looking for every little thing to get worked up about and berate him for.  I personally don't have an issue with ISIS getting bombed.  Would be fine if Obama or Hillary did it, too.

[RedskinsFan44]

I am good with blowing up members of ISIS, be it with MOAB or with drone deployed Hellfires. I'm a bit concerned that a man with a fragile ego has only found good press when he has acted militarily.  Well, there was that time he read the teleprompter in front of Congress without ad libbing, but that only lasted a day.

[LD0506]

Knowing that Mattis and McMasters are actively involved in operations dampens a lot of concerns I might have, these guys are consumate pros. Let Mattis staff according to his own plan and I'll feel even better.

 

I am far more worried about what will happens to Americans here at home stemming from the others in charge that are far less competent and capable.

[PeterMP]

1 hour ago, zoony said:

Sounds like the bomb collapsed a cave network filled with isis assholes

 

Trying my best too give a ****.  Yup, still nothing

 

Where was all this anger over Obamas drone program?  Does credibility even matter at this point?  Serios question

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

 

I dont really recall anyone in here arguing the moral validity of drone strikes when Obama was in office except for the board's resident Muslim.  Yet here we have a whole thread dedicated to one single bombing.  One.

And then there are various other posts scatter through threads, like this one:

 

 

(And, I'm pointing out things that I've posted, but you can certainly find things by others too.)

[TradeTheBeal!]

31 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Kinda my point.  It's ok when your guys do it.  When the guy you hate does it, it's a different story.  

 

For the record, not a Trump fan, but I'm also not looking for every little thing to get worked up about and berate him for.  I personally don't have an issue with ISIS getting bombed.  Would be fine if Obama or Hillary did it, too.

 

The Obama drone policy was a cohesive effort to constrain ISIS while limiting American casualties.  It's efficacy and legality were challenged from many sides and with good reason.  Not sure anybody can honestly say that what Trump is doing cohesive...or even appears to be.  Splashy is the word that comes to mind.

 

As far as bombing ISIS, and bombing ISIS would seem to be the most "bi-partisan" agreement we have these days, you kinda answered your own question.  Our military draws a lot water from the tax base and it's fair for the American people to demand results.  You can choose to view it through the lens of partisanism and punditry, but it really goes a lot deeper than that.

 

Also, **** ISIS.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just now, TryTheBeal! said:

 

The Obama drone policy was a cohesive effort to constrain ISIS while limiting American casualties.  It's efficacy and legality were challenged from many sides and with good reason.  Not sure anybody can honestly say that what Trump is doing cohesive...or even appears to be.  Splashy is the word that comes to mind.

 

As far as bombing ISIS, and bombing ISIS would seem to be the most "bi-partisan" issue we have these days, you kinda answered your own question.  Our military draws a lot water from the tax base and it's fair for the American people to demand results.  You can choose to view it through the lens of partisanism and punditry, but it really goes a lot deeper than that.

 

Also, **** ISIS.

 

But does it really?  I mean, this sounds like it was just carrying out an Obama initiative.  At any rate, the Obama drone policy didn't really seem to stop anyone from gushing over him in his final weeks in office.

 

i like you dude but I get the feeling that if Trump said the sky was blue you'd get pissed off and try to argue that it was a shade of green.

[TradeTheBeal!]

1 minute ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

But does it really?  I mean, this sounds like it was just carrying out an Obama initiative.  At any rate, the Obama drone policy didn't really seem to stop anyone from gushing over him in his final weeks in office.

 

i like you dude but I get the feeling that if Trump said the sky was blue you'd get pissed off and try to argue that it was a shade of green.

 

Welp, we're back to the credibility question.  I don't find Trump particularly credible...far less so than Obama...so 

I feel like my skepticism is healthy and well-earned.  You're free to come to a different conclusion regarding Trumps credibility but I'm not sure I could understand how that occurred.  Time will tell how effective this "splashy" policy will be.

 

And I like you too.

[PeterMP]

4 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

But does it really?  I mean, this sounds like it was just carrying out an Obama initiative.  At any rate, the Obama drone policy didn't really seem to stop anyone from gushing over him in his final weeks in office.

 

i like you dude but I get the feeling that if Trump said the sky was blue you'd get pissed off and try to argue that it was a shade of green.

 

Where did you see it was an Obama administration initiative because I'm not seeing that:

 

"The mission had been in the planning stages for months, the Pentagon said in a separate statement. However, they "did not have the information" on whether the mission was being planned during the previous Obama administration."

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gbu-43b-mother-of-all-bombs-massive-ordnance-air-blast-afghanistan-isis-a7682996.html

 

(Not, IMO that changes much.)