Rand Paul: Generals are corrupting Trump's anti-war instincts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dannno

No, it's technically a correct statement in response to what zippy wrote and does not mean at all what you are implying by posting the quote out of context.. Go back and read it, I filled in the missing context in brackets []. The point is that I was not saying what you are implying. I'm not faulting you, it was confusing, just correcting you.

A single statement can mean multiple things based on context, and you have to read the context into the sentence to understand it. That is often how fake news gets Trump. But the point is, the mean of the statement I wrote was "who cares what the excuse is for bringing the troops home if we bring them home". If you read the statement in the context of responding what zippy said carefully, you will see it.

---

I still don't understand how you think what you originally wrote could mean what you wanted to say but I am perfectly willing to believe that you didn't mean what it looked like you said, it didn't sound like you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swordsmyth

I still don't understand how you think what you originally wrote could mean what you wanted to say but I am perfectly willing to believe that you didn't mean what it looked like you said, it didn't sound like you.

---

Let's start from the beginning of the exchange:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dannno

Once Trump gets what he wants from the MIC (a win against ISIS), he will start cutting them out.

---

(cutting them out = bring them home)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zippyjuan

We have heard that one before.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/...h_1112950c.jpg

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dannno

Original with context in brackets: Really who gives a shit [what the excuse is] if we bring them home

---

You can say it without what is in the brackets, and technically it means the same thing. It can also mean something entirely different without the context.

I should have worded better, but it is not technically incorrect from a grammatical standpoint.

I said Trump will bring them home and declare victory against ISIS, zippy responds with what Bush did when he proclaimed victory against the war on terror, and responded that it doesn't matter why we bring the troops home as long as that is what happens, and we can see that Trump is pushing for that heavily. I never saw Bush push for troop reductions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dannno

Let's start from the beginning of the exchange:




(cutting them out = bring them home)






You can say it without what is in the brackets, and technically it means the same thing. It can also mean something entirely different without the context.

I should have worded better, but it is not technically incorrect from a grammatical standpoint.

---

Now I see, "IF" should have been "AS LONG AS" for clarity.

Ya that would have been better.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7905841.html

Quote:

---

Trump expected to send 4,000 extra troops to Afghanistan

Decision contradicts Mr Trump's earlier criticisms of war effort

Donald Trump has agreed to send as many as 4,000 additional US troops to Afghanistan to tackle a steadily deteriorating security situation in the beleaguered country, according to senior officials quoted in American media.

The report comes ahead of a pre-planned speech by the President on Monday evening to spell out his policy for Afghanistan. Mr Trump and his advisors had signaled for days that a decision on the president's Afghanistan strategy was forthcoming.

In agreeing to boost troop levels in Afghanistan, Mr Trump has cemented America's continuing involvement in a conflict that has now stretched across three presidential administrations and nearly two decades.

---

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHypTGAXYAAXTof.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C9UcE9CU0AAErxd.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dannno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhFHIlwCSq0


[/FONT][/FONT]

---

So infowars quoting the Washington Post trying to slant it to make Trump look good is not 'fake news'?

Good to know, it's hard to keep up sometimes. The definition seems a bit fluid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Origanalist

So infowars quoting the Washington Post trying to slant it to make Trump look good is not 'fake news'?

Good to know, it's hard to keep up sometimes. The definition seems a bit fluid.

---

C'mon.. you're better than that.

The WaPo article was written with the narrative that Trump is unhinged and fighting with his cabinet. That is the fake news narrative.

The real story is what infowars wrote, using the actual quotes that they reported on which can be verified, in which Trump is pushing to pull out the troops and his cabinet is doing everything including using ridiculous scare tactics to keep the troops in place and expand the wars.

The fake news media reports quotes out of context, use sources who make things up, etc.. But these can all be verified, I guarantee you will not see Trump coming out saying he didn't make these statements in the meeting or anything like that.

Maybe someone should inform Rand that it is the generals that are actually in control of the government corporation on a day-to-day basis and Trump isn't. That whole 'gold-fringed military flag standing behind Trump every time he speaks' dealie. Hell, maybe someone should tell Trump that.

I guess is that Trump has been briefed on his own assassination plans if we decides to pull out of the Middle East.