Anatta was right - NYT confirms Deep State White House coup attempt is real

Darth Omar said:
I guess it depends on which definition you want to use.

One of the reasons I typically avoid using the term is because I consider it a bit of a catchphrase. I usually just say ‘elements within the government’ and leave it at that. If there are people in Trump’s administration that are thwarting Trump’s agenda—as the NYT ghost writer claims, they qualify as a Deep State.

Take your NYT vindication and run with it lol.
Click to expand...

Instead of using "elements within the government" or "deep state" lets call these people what they really are- Heros and true American patriots!
 
archives said:
So all 1,212 individuals working under the White House umbrella have direct access to what lies on the President's desk?

And what the Senate approves, which is controlled by Trump's party, was put before them by Trump himself, and is a rubber stamp function
Click to expand...

No one can perfectly vet 1200 people and if the Senate did anything more than perfunctory hearings on them it would takes months and months to get through it.

Yup, I’m sure ‘senior administration officials’ put crap on Trump’s desk quite a bit. They’re there to serve the president.
 
floridafan said:
Instead of using "elements within the government" or "deep state" lets call these people what they really are- Heros and true American patriots!
Click to expand...

Nice precedent you have going there.

How hard will you cry when they do the same thing to the next democrat president? And yes, you WILL be reminded.
 
Darth Omar said:
Nice precedent you have going there.

How hard will you cry when they do the same thing to the next democrat president? And yes, you WILL be reminded.
Click to expand...

I just can't seem to remember when this has happened to a democratic President in the past. It seems to be more of a republican issue, first Nixon and then Trump.
Have you even bothered to consider that this president could very well be an eminent danger to this country and the patriots within his White House are attempting to protect this country.
 
anatta said:
like who?
Saddam had a "will to fight" his army did not.
Are you including Qadafi here? he was a dictator and we had to bomb his army and drone his army to get him to die -he never quit fighting. so who is it you refer to here?
Click to expand...

Wow.
Look what you just wrote you two faced hypocrite.Not

Not going to help you but I will give you a clue.

Quadafi gave an interview during the run up to the neocon Long War.

If you can find it you will have all your answers and more,
it was an incredible commentary.

If you chose not to find it I certainly will understand, since you are truly not actually seeking enlightenment.
 
Rune said:
You don't know jackshit about history or military you blustering asshole.
The truth is that after Gulf War 1, Saddam was emasculated and presented no threat whatsoever.

What history has clearly shown is that when tin pot dictators and strongman are bombed by US they invariably lose their will to fight.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your hind sight General Patton. Now you can get fucked. At the time the entire fucking world thought Saddam had WMDs and would use them. In closing you're not fucking correct and spouting stupidity.
 
Rune said:
You don't know jackshit about history or military you blustering asshole.
The truth is that after Gulf War 1, Saddam was emasculated and presented no threat whatsoever.

What history has clearly shown is that when tin pot dictators and strongman are bombed by US they invariably lose their will to fight.
Click to expand...

Apparently you're the one who doesn't know jackshit dumbfuck. Saddam wasn't emasculated; he was merely ejected from a neighboring nation he invaded and then the global community stood by and watched him thumb his nose at them. There were plenty of willing actors who continue to do business with him despite sanctions.

History has PROVEN that bombing alone can do nothing to force a nation into submission. Unless of course it is nuclear.
 
Grumpy said:
Thank you for your hind sight General Patton. Now you can get fucked. At the time the entire fucking world thought Saddam had WMDs and would use them. In closing you're not fucking correct and spouting stupidity.
Click to expand...

Bush KNEW that Saddam did not have WMD, so lets get the terminology straight.
 
Rune said:
Not an answer.
Which country?
Click to expand...

it was an answer you ignorant dumbfuck; you asked what state like a dumbass thinking I made a mistake. I am pretty sure you don't even know what you are trying to argue given the moronic flailing exhibited here.
 
Darth Omar said:
No one can perfectly vet 1200 people and if the Senate did anything more than perfunctory hearings on them it would takes months and months to get through it.

Yup, I’m sure ‘senior administration officials’ put crap on Trump’s desk quite a bit. They’re there to serve the president.
Click to expand...

What a crock of shut.
At best a small handful of people have access to the Oval Office.

Stop being such a retard.
 
Thing1 said:
That's a cop-out answer. C'mon- you can seriously do better than that.

You're trying to justify it admirably, but the plain fact is that one of the last NIE's before the war basically stated that Saddam wasn't even a threat to his immediate neighbors, much less an imminent threat to the U.S.
Click to expand...

They were baloney and the Saudis and Kuwaitis would beg to disagree with them as well. Yes, they are neighbors. The Iranians probably didn't feel to comfy with Iraq next door either.

But do link one here that says Saddam was harmless.

Key Judgments [from October 2002 NIE]
Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction
We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)

We judge that we are seeing only a portion of Iraq's WMD efforts, owing to Baghdad's vigorous denial and deception efforts. Revelations after the Gulf war starkly demonstrate the extensive efforts undertaken by Iraq to deny information. We lack specific information on many key aspects of Iraq's WMD programs.

Since inspections ended in 1998, Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; in the view of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

More here:

https://fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html
 
Last edited:
Thing1 said:
That's a cop-out answer. C'mon- you can seriously do better than that.

You're trying to justify it admirably, but the plain fact is that one of the last NIE's before the war basically stated that Saddam wasn't even a threat to his immediate neighbors, much less an imminent threat to the U.S.
Click to expand...

Why waste time trying to teach a moron Civics.
 
floridafan said:
I just can't seem to remember when this has happened to a democratic President in the past. It seems to be more of a republican issue, first Nixon and then Trump.
Have you even bothered to consider that this president could very well be an eminent danger to this country and the patriots within his White House are attempting to protect this country.
Click to expand...

If they really thought that they’d come out with it, publicly. Do you mean to imply they are cowards?

If you want to psychoanalyze Trump look at his actions. His economic policies are apparently pretty sound. He’s already appointed one top notch SCOTUS judge and will soon have another. That makes two of them. Does that sound like the product of a debilitated mind?

Ironically, Trump’s Twitter account is exculpatory. If Trump was dangerously unstable he’d be apt to Tweet his plans to bomb NK before noon, and Tweet it before his advisors could stop him from doing it. Trump Tweets crap he shouldn’t but more often than not what he Tweets is cogent and on point. Though Trump is absolutely a loose canon and is prone to say what’s on his mind. Myself and millions of other Trump supporters find his candor refreshing.

But being a loose cannon isn’t a psych diagnosis.
 
Grumpy said:
Oh is that right? I wonder why Congress after seeing the international intelligence that said Saddam had WMDs and overwhelmingly approved the invasion.
Click to expand...

This has zero to do with Congress and everything to do with the weapons inspectors who were on site in 2003. That said that they needed just a short time to finish their investigation, but were sure that there were no WMD' sin Iraq. Bush disregarded their report, had them withdrawn, and invaded anyway.
Some time later, I heard a radio interview with one of these inspectors, and he said that before they even entered Iraq, they were sure that there were no WMD's. Thats because there were a whole lot of chemicals that Saddam would have had to order to help produce these weapons, and there was no evidence that they had been ordered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top