Trump Presidency

[matthewfarmery]

But the issue is, America isn't at war with either country. And so should not be doing any strikes. From that link, America was targeting combat units, but civilian casualties were going to happen. Which to me says, they know that a target of opportunity was in the known location, but still acted even though there are none combat units close by.

And as for the war on terror, well, that started with the war on Afghanistan and Iraq, and the BS that led to those wars, and the outcome. And we know who is to blame for taking us into those wars.

But these strikes against the boats are different, there is no war against those countries, and congress needs to approve any war before it goes ahead. And congress hasn't done that. Unlike the above link, which would have had congress approval. To me, that makes the past scenario and the current one a bit different. Trump hasn't got congress approval. Thus no act of war on either country. Plus lets not forget the strikes were done in international waters.

So Trump gave the excuse that these boats were bring drugs into America. And that is all the justification that he needed. But in that case, wouldn't he still need congress to approve his actions? without that, These killers are unlawful. And I think that is the key difference.

edit

I still think the war on terror was wrong, plus the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, But Bush and Blair should have been made accountable. but never were. I mean, the whole war on terror really started with 9/11. But we got our facts wrong(or certain people lied to get both main countries into a war that was costly). Then its WMDs that Iraq NEVER had, or was never found. And the long wars that lasted there. In that respect, but Bush and Blair should have been held accountable for taking us (US / UK and a few others) into a war without any justification. And in that case, both should have been charged with war crimes. As both lied to congress and the parliament to get backing for a war that was costly, and many died, both combat units and many none combat units.

Sadly, the war on terror branched out from that. And still gave America and the UK to use that. even if it was wrong at the time. So yes, Obama should be made accountable as well.

[Chips]

Last I checked, the US hasn't done a strike on Colombia, nor Venezuela. Just boats carrying it's citizens in international waters. In a self-professed "War on Drugs" (first coined in 1969, when the US claimed it was starting a war on drugs that has resulted in the US providing money, weapons, and it's own soldiers/agencies to combat -- code word for kill -- drug dealers, growers and more around the world).

Meanwhile, USA *did* attack countries that it wasn't at war with; Pakistan; Yemen; Somalia; Iraq (after they'd pulled out); Syria; Libya - killing *their* citizens without any due process - to fulfil it's self-declared "War on terror" (true, this was indeed approved by the US Govt in a vote - and it's very broad; nations, organisations, individuals involved or suspected of being involved in terror. Without defining quite what).

They even killed the Iranian General in Iraq. When they weren't at war with either nation.

https://www.ecchr.eu/en/case/important- ... top%20them.

Since 2002, the US has used targeted drone attacks to kill people suspected of being involved in terrorism – particularly in the years 2012 - 2019 in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Libyen, Yemen and elsewhere. The US drone attacks violate international humanitarian law, yet no one has been able to stop them. On the contrary, Germany supports the US drone program by exchanging information and giving the US comprehensive rights for military bases such as Ramstein. These strikes are not as “surgical” as the US claims, and often result in civilian deaths.

I understand what you say - it is "more legitimate" when it's collateral damage against a war on terror; we've all seen the outcome of terror attacks and it's indiscriminate and horrible. I'm not personally saying they shouldn't pursue/prosecute said war whatsoever, so it's "legitimate" even if they're only "suspected" (zero threshold known) of being "involved".

It's murder when it's targeting unknown suspected "drug runners" in a "war" on drugs for which I don't think there's been any such vote. Oh wait...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ce-cartels

There has (no, I don't think it's "legit" either )

I think the various international agencies will point out - both are/were illegal.

Israel, I believe, is the worst for "involved" and "suspected". Their auto-target generation literally meant if your phone had been in proximity of another phone that belongs to someone *suspected* of being involved with Hamas, you became a legitimate target for indiscriminate killing.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/ ... airstrikes

Perhaps having seen the lack of international response Trump feels emboldened. Or that posting about blowing up boats allegedly carrying drugs is proving his strong man/direct action on issues.

But I wouldn't feel comfortable about how any links anything together to say "they were guilty... we have some unpresentable proof!" because history has shown that to be a method of killing thousands of civilians trying to live their lives in very challenging locations/circumstances.

It's all wrong. Just needs some consistency. If Trump is a war criminal, then imo - so is Obama. You don't have to agree... you just voiced your opinion about Trump and I'm challenging it a bit by widening the context significantly beyond the scope of the thread.

Not upon whether it's correct, just are we consistent?

[matthewfarmery]

Any kind of killing is wrong. Doesn't matter who does it or not. But still, regard to Obama's order on striking targets, wouldn't congress be informed? and updated on what been happening? and if so, wouldn't they have the power to stop the attacks? Or at least reign in a president if they have gone too far?

In regard to the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, congress was lied too, but it led to two horrible wars that have never had anyone held to account. But like I said, the war on terror stemmed from that. But did that still give America justification to go after combat targets? and there the thing, they were suppose to be combat targets right?

But sadly civilians were killed. Sadly, your always going have casualties in war. We only have to see Ukraine and Gaza for that. But those are separate subjects.

But still, Trump still doesn't have congress approval, Obama might have had some approval for the strikes, But Trump does not. To me, that makes things different. IF congress has said, we will give Trump the authority to do these strikes, then OK. But what happened to due process? What happened to making sure that the boats were indeed carrying drugs and the people onboard were known drug runners and dealers?

Without that due process, then it just vigilantism, or lawlessness. As we have to take the word of a man who lies all the time. and is totally and utter deranged. someone who is now trying to use the nuclear option on congress, so reduce the votes to 60, (remove the fibibuster rule or something along those lines) Plus a president who is getting people to start up nuclear weapon testing again.

So, the problem is, Trump is out of control, and only recently are we seeing the senate try and kill the tariffs that have been hurting America.

But Trump is deranged. if these strikes were on his orders, and he basically saying, I want them all dead. Then that should be a real concern. I don't think any other recent president (apart from Bush Junior) Who has acted so lawlessly. So again, that does change the context a bit. Trump isn't a sane man. If he was, he might not be striking these boats at all. But he doing it for a reason. And we should be concern on what that reason is.

[Observe]

But still, regard to Obama's order on striking targets, wouldn't congress be informed? and updated on what been happening? and if so, wouldn't they have the power to stop the attacks? Or at least reign in a president if they have gone too far?
...
But still, Trump still doesn't have congress approval, Obama might have had some approval for the strikes, But Trump does not. To me, that makes things different. IF congress has said, we will give Trump the authority to do these strikes, then OK. But what happened to due process? What happened to making sure that the boats were indeed carrying drugs and the people onboard were known drug runners and dealers?

The president must notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing U.S. forces into situations where combat is imminent.

Trump did that for the first strike on September 2, 2025, framing it as "self-defense" against cartels designated as terrorist organizations. The administration has sent follow-up notifications for subsequent strikes, including a recent one on October 30 briefing GOP senators.

Obama's drone strikes (killing thousands) relied on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, without new congressional approval for each target. Congress was briefed via classified sessions.

Congress doesn't have an automatic "off switch" to halt these operations mid-stream without passing new legislation or invoking the War Powers Resolution's 60-day clock (after which forces must withdraw unless authorized).

Both Trump and Obama have stretched executive power but haven't broken the law strictly speaking.

[matthewfarmery]

Seems that there was a Thursday briefing about the strikes in the senate, but the dems were denied access to that briefing. Which has angered some even in the GOP saying, "that isn't how the system is meant to work"

Another thing, looks like the U.N Human rights chief has got involved, stating along the lines of, the strikes need to stop.

@Observe, thanks for the update, I didn't know that. So stand corrected on that. But I do agree, that things are getting stretched too far. But if the UN are now getting involved. We will see what happens. But I don't anything will change?

[fiksal]

Any kind of killing is wrong. Doesn't matter who does it or not.

yep, that's a good summary

Americans tend to forget that

[felter]

It's all just escalation. First you had the press and the publics shock at them killing people, followed up by governments and the family's of those being murdered, now it's went all the way up to the UN, there is only one more place really left to comment and that is the ICC, at some point they have to get involved, I mean murder is murder no matter who it is that is doing it. I wonder if those pilots who have been pressing the trigger realized that they are probably going to be facing a murder charge sometime in their future.

[matthewfarmery]

I hope the ICC does get involved. If the strikes on boats continue, then yes, they have to get involved.

So, Trump has returned to florida, not much of a big deal right? except there is still a shutdown. and congress has been shutdown formally for another week.

While at the same time, Trump is continuing to blame the dems. saying he will talk, but still insists its all the dems fault. LOL

This man is a coward. I personally don't see an end to the shutdown. I don't see Trump interested in talking to anyone. How long before the cracks start appearing and America gets enraged over Trump? Especailly when SNAP funding is still withheld.

Well, a judge has stepped in regarding preventing the congress woman from being seated.

A federal judge has stepped in by issuing a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that effectively forces the seating of Arizona Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva. The judge ordered that she be sworn in immediately, ending a delay by House Speaker Mike Johnson

Basically, the JUDGE said, preventing this congress woman from being seated is unconstitutional. Just because it was a shutdown, should not have prevented this woman from being seated. So she will have be to seated. otherwise the Judge will have to take farther action. And MAGA Mike has lost this. And it going to hurt him. Also may threaten his job.

[matthewfarmery]

America MIGHT be going to war with Venezuela, While Trump has denied that America is going to war. But from a few sources, it starting to look that way. the Air craft carrier, and other Troop deployments. I would be surprised if America doesn't go to war. But with everything that has happened. Trump will likely try and make this into another distraction.

After all, millions in America are going to starve, some food banks have already run out. SNAP funding is still been withhold and other matters. And congress is again on vacation.

And while this is happening, Trump and Co are having a lavish dinner or two at his Florida home.

So we could see the start of this illegal war in a few weeks or sooner. But like I said, there had to be more then striking boats. there had to be a real reason why, and attacking Venezuela could be that reason and installing a puppet regime in its place.

Challenge me if you like, But the things fit if that is the case. All the while millions are going to starve. and Trump doesn't care less.

[matthewfarmery]

Things are getting interesting. Marjorie Taylor Greene has now gone on record to say, that "forgotten American’s should overthrow the government" She has done at least one interview where she has said this.

I guess she finally seeing the facts. and things are getting desperate. Didn't care for her. And that she like many GOP blindly voted for the BB bill. (without reading it) So yeah, she has a point. Congress has failed the American people. So have Trump.

[Observe]

After all, millions in America are going to starve, some food banks have already run out. SNAP funding is still been withhold and other matters. And congress is again on vacation.

Meanwhile, Trump on Friday said he's asking "the Court to clarify how we can legally fund SNAP as soon as possible". Trump on Truth Social:

I do NOT want Americans to go hungry just because the Radical Democrats refuse to do the right thing and REOPEN THE GOVERNMENT...If we are given the appropriate legal direction by the Court, it will BE MY HONOR to provide the funding, just like I did with Military and Law Enforcement Pay.

It would be nice if the Democrats would vote to reopen the government, so that Congress can get back to work. Otherwise, I suppose Trump will have to find some way around it.

[matthewfarmery]

You do realise that the SNAP funding which is suppose to be 8 billion, was already set aside for this very thing. It was used during the last shutdown. It's the GOP that is withholding the funding. Why else do you thing half of the country is suing Trump to get the government to release the funds?

So, another thing, if the GOP really cared for the people of America, why then have idiots like Kash Patel in, who is using a private jet to ferry his girlfriend around the country?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/fbi ... 04603.html
OK maybe not around the country, but certainly using a private jet to meet her, even though he slammed others for using private jets for other purposes. And also for leaking stuff regarding FBI invesitations. The guy is a total loser.

Or that Trunp and co are having a lavish dinners at people's expense?

What Trump said is totally bogus,

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/snap-food- ... -shutdown/

Two judges have stepped into to say that the government must continue with SNAP funding.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump- ... rcna241187

Basically, Trump and co are saying, that this emergency funding is being reserved for other emergencies, like hurricanes and such what. Yet congress did set this money aside. So the government should easy be able to release it. But they don't.

Stop blaming the democrats, this is Trump and co playing politics with people's lives.

[matthewfarmery]

Take a look here,

https://www.the-independent.com/news/wo ... 56657.html

Some pictures of Trump's lavish dinner party. It's just a real spit in the face to Americans who are going to start starving once those SNAP funds run out. Trump doesn't care about the average American. Remember what he said, "I don't care about you, I just want your vote" He and his rich palls are basically being well fed, they don't give a crap about anyone else. Otherwise, Trump would have been in DC. And trying to get the shutdown sorted, RIGHT? If he cared so much about starving Americans, why isn't he in DC? Like I said, he doesn't give a crap.

[Observe]

Stop blaming the democrats, this is Trump and co playing politics with people's lives.

Democrats have voted 13 times and counting to keep the government shut down. It's as simple as that. I don't know how else it can be spun.

[fiksal]

what are the Democrats demands exactly? Pay the government employees and into social services, last I recall?

Not good for Republicans? Rather play some golf? To the guillotines then

[felter]

You say Democrats have voted 13 times to continue to shut the government down, something I haven't heard that they actually voted on, but hey whatever, my question is what has the Republicans been doing to end the shutdown, what has Mike Johnson been doing to bring everyone back into place, to end the shutdown, what has the President done to help out the American population during this time. These are something I also have not heard anyone mention. I have seen Johnson doing everything possible to keep it going, to keep everyone away. Meanwhile, Trump has been partying, playing golf and committing acts of murder, watching and laughing as 40 million Americans have been worrying about what they are going to do for food, which is something the Democrats have been trying to solve on their own,

[Observe]

You say Democrats have voted 13 times to continue to shut the government down, something I haven't heard that they actually voted on, but hey whatever, my question is what has the Republicans been doing to end the shutdown...

The House passed a simple, clean, continuing resolution (CR) and sent it to the Senate. Senate Democrats are refusing to pass the bill. Thus, the government is shut down. As a result, social programs such as food stamps have run out of money.

What has Mike Johnson been doing to bring everyone back into place, to end the shutdown, what has the President done to help out the American population during this time. These are something I also have not heard anyone mention

The House, led by Johnson, have done their job - they sent the bill to the Senate, where it's stuck.

I have seen Johnson doing everything possible to keep it going, to keep everyone away.

Not true. It's in the Senate, not the House. No reason for the House to be in session as long as the government is shut down. As soon as the bill is passed, the House can reconvene, and everyone can get back to work on how to fund health care and all the rest moving forward.

Meanwhile, Trump has been partying, playing golf and committing acts of murder, watching and laughing as 40 million Americans have been worrying about what they are going to do for food, which is something the Democrats have been trying to solve on their own

Trump is trying to find ways to fund basic social programs with existing, but inadequate emergency funding. Democrats are trying to keep the government closed.

[matthewfarmery]

The Democrats are trying to say Obamacare, and prevent healthcare insurance from going up. And that was only because the GOP pasted that horrible BB bill. And lets not forget that shortly after that, rural hospitals started to close.

Your forgetting who started this mess observe. The BB bill helped the rich, but left the poor in the dark. The GOP have been trying to kill obamacare for a long time now, but no replacement. And again nothing from Trump. I mean, If he and GOP were serious in replacing the American health system, wouldn't they have done it by now? would they have come up with a more affordable package?

The problem is, if this bill passes, health insurance will skyrocket. But the GOP aren't interested in talking. Neither is Trump. Its either their way, or the highway.

[matthewfarmery]

@Observe, did you even look aty the independent link I posted above?

Or take a look here,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w8IpA-jziY

This was Trump's 1920's style party that he had night. Also from one pool reporter, "I little party never killed nobody"

Trump has surrounded himself with billionaires and his inner circle. How can you keep defending this guy? when millions are going to go without food? Didn't you even read some of the links I posted? That the government is legally bound to release that money for SNAP. But its the government that is making excuses on why that money is being withheld.

Do that party look like individuals who care for the country that they are suppose to represent? Or maybe, they don't give a damn, and only interested in themselves.

[clakclak]

You say Democrats have voted 13 times to continue to shut the government down, something I haven't heard that they actually voted on, but hey whatever, my question is what has the Republicans been doing to end the shutdown...

The House passed a simple, clean, continuing resolution (CR) and sent it to the Senate. Senate Democrats are refusing to pass the bill. Thus, the government is shut down. As a result, social programs such as food stamps have run out of money.



[...]

Money is not the issue. In fact a judge has already said the Trump administration must use the funds available to continue paying SNAP. The issue is willingness. It is highly likely, that instead of following the judges order, the Trump administration will appeal the decision in an attempt not to pay out any benefits.

Source: https://apnews.com/article/snap-shutdow ... c99c131b73