How about that migrant caravan ??

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by detbuch
Lack of character? You want to talk about lack of character? People who throw rocks at other people who are not doing anything to them don't show the character of anyone I want coming here.

Originally Posted by wdmso

So you either support the use of deadly force on all people in all events where things are thrown at police or you do not it's not a hard choice .

It would be helpful if you actually read the posts you respond to. I said nothing about deadly force. Although, I suppose, a well placed rock could kill someone. But, because it was a rock, not a gun, I'm guessing you wouldn't consider it deadly force. And I didn't say anything about making a choice, hard or easy.

Maybe you were talking to somebody else? Or maybe you merely didn't have a clear idea, a cogent thought, a shred of awareness, about what you were saying.

Or do you support this simply because of who they are are and where they are from

Again, where do you get that I support "this" or anything else? Again, pay attention. Read the actual words before your eyes, not the pre-conceived ones floating in your skull, waiting to pounce them out at whoever crosses your path.

Actually, I did make an implication about "who they are".

But not about where they are from. Is that another ready made slander lurking in your "world view" to blindly hurl at someone who has said nothing about ethnicity? At someone whom you have no knowledge about where he stands on the matter? Is that a sort of finisher, a coup de grâce to convincingly prove the merit of your argument and the ugly bias of your opponent? If so, it is a particularly deceitful and disgusting tactic to use in a civilized discussion.

As to "who they are," I clearly and specifically said "People who throw rocks at other people who are not doing anything to them". And about them that they "don't show the character of anyone I want coming here."

Now if you want to comment on what I actually said, that might be of interest.


its sad that our troops in Afghanistan wouldn't shoot people who throw rocks in a combat zone .. yet some American here see no issue with the idea ... must be that MAGA thing

Are you're equating the border situation to a combat zone? That implies that the "caravan" is more of a forceful attempt to enter the U.S. (invasion?) rather than a peaceful attempt, by mostly innocent women and children who are accompanied by some men.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Originally Posted by detbuch
Lack of character? You want to talk about lack of character? People who throw rocks at other people who are not doing anything to them don't show the character of anyone I want coming here.



Are you're equating the border situation to a combat zone? That implies that the "caravan" is more of a forceful attempt to enter the U.S. (invasion?) rather than a peaceful attempt, by mostly innocent women and children who are accompanied by some men.

clearly the opposite.. and if you cant see the difference I cant help you

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

clearly the opposite.. and if you cant see the difference I cant help you

You're the one that brought up "combat zone" in relation to the situation at the border. Maybe you can be more clear how you compare the border thing with an Afghan "combat zone."

Trump said lethal force was acceptable IF NECESSARY. I don't believe he said it was OK just because people were throwing rocks. Did our troops shoot people in Afghanistan IF IT WAS NECESSARY?

Apparently, Mattis has it under his control. I think he knows what he is doing.

The memo written by Chief of Staff Kelly (not Trump) states that troops may "perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary," if there is "credible evidence and intelligence," including "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Beware of fake news.

[scottw]

leftist narrative "facts" train must not be derailed ...whooo...whooo

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Trump said lethal force was acceptable IF NECESSARY. I don't believe he said it was OK just because people were throwing rocks. Did our troops shoot people in Afghanistan IF IT WAS NECESSARY?

Apparently, Mattis has it under his control. I think he knows what he is doing.

.

Well rocks were thrown, and no one was shot. So it would appear Trump didn't give a direct order.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You're the one that brought up "combat zone" in relation to the situation at the border. Maybe you can be more clear how you compare the border thing with an Afghan "combat zone."

Trump said lethal force was acceptable IF NECESSARY. I don't believe he said it was OK just because people were throwing rocks. Did our troops shoot people in Afghanistan IF IT WAS NECESSARY?

Apparently, Mattis has it under his control. I think he knows what he is doing.

The memo written by Chief of Staff Kelly (not Trump) states that troops may "perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary," if there is "credible evidence and intelligence," including "a show or use of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search."

Beware of fake news.

Consider it a rifle," trump said. "When they throw rocks like they did at the Mexico military police, consider it a rifle."

Sure he walked it back but it’s a full time job for his staff but that’s really the point
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

wait....the left considers words ..."weapons"...but rocks aren't?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by scottw

wait....the left considers words ..."weapons"...but rocks aren't?

Absolutely. The left weaponizes words by twisting them, or redefining them, to mean things that weaken and destroy their enemies. And they'll leave out words which also changes the meaning of what is said. Such as leaving out specific portrayals and delineations such as "if necessary" or:

“I will tell you this, anybody throwing stones, rocks, like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico, we will consider that a firearm,” Trump said. “Because there’s not much difference. When you get hit in the face with a rock, which as you know, that was very violent a few days ago. Very, very violent.”

And it is especially easy to use Trump's words against him because he compresses larger ideas into syntax too narrow to express what he totally means. That habit may be accentuated by resorting so much to tweets which require smaller messages. He often has to explain later what he meant.

At any rate, the policy in place re use of force more fully explains what Trump didn't. And I suspect that Trump critics know this, but will continue their tactic anyway. WDMSO sort of admits that when he says "Sure he walked it back but it’s a full time job for his staff but that’s really the point." Isn't it necessary for a presidential staff to be "full time"? And he didn't say, to begin with, that such was really the point. He just wanted to paint Trump out to be some monster.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by scottw

wait....the left considers words ..."weapons"...but rocks aren't?

Funny
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device