Jesse Ventura Calls For The Arrest Of Donald Trump

Seems to be the attack on Syria that got Jesse triggered:

Trump should be arrested for doing that, for violating the very thing he took an oath. Here in the military you take an oath to protect the constitution and the bill of rights from all enemies foreign and domestic. Well, then I took an oath to protect myself against Donald Trump, because Donald Trump is violating the constitution by going to war without congresses permission. You don't go to war without congresses consent, the founders were clear on this

The gist of it, Trump attacked a sovereign nation outside of constitutional bounds. I'll note Trump certainly isn't the first, and won't be the last. Jesse wasn't soft on the Dems as well, referring to their major losses and disconnection with the public. He had a lot to gripe about. Jesse also forgot that pesky war powers resolution that grants the below:

The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30-day withdrawal period,

Still I see Jesse's frustration. It doesn't help the administration has gotten cozy with the military industrial complex, pumping billions, brining in Neocons the likes of Bolton and Cotton. Trump's putting Cheney to shame at the rate he's going. Then we have the most recent revelation that Trump Jnr met with the Gulf states Emissary who allegedly offered to help with the election. Those Saudi's a sure friendly with this administration and why not? They've got a mutual enemy, Iran.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

President Trump has good military advisors. It's too bad he lost Flynn, he would have been a great asset. I see the President's actions as justified, and executed magnificently. How many civilian casualties, Mr. Ventura? Oh, none? Hmm.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Jesse Ventura, from the moment he was recognised on this site has failed to deliver in any respect,he simply regurgitates everything we are all thinking.... i'll stick with what i said in a thread 4 years ago, Steven Seagal wanna be.... bad movies, terrible conspiracies....

Childish Gambino has substance, Jesse couldnt bite through a weet bix...

a reply to: Zelun

I see the President's actions as justified

Why do you see them as justified? Syria hasn't attacked America. Syria is a sovereign nation by any definition. The matters they are facing have nothing to do with America. That and that, just like Obama and Libya, they're going into another nation without going through congress properly.

Define 'justified'. Having good advisors doesn't automatically justify an action.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Zelun

I see the President's actions as justified

Why do you see them as justified? Syria hasn't attacked America. Syria is a sovereign nation by any definition. The matters they are facing have nothing to do with America. That and that, just like Obama and Libya, they're going into another nation without going through congress properly.

Define 'justified'. Having good advisors doesn't automatically justify an action.

Obama owns Libya and Syria.

Let me know when Assad is actually deposed, as opposed to declawed.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Obama owns Libya and Syria.

So Obama is to blame for Trump's own actions in the whitehouse? This is the very definition of the 'thanks Obama' excuse that gets thrown around to deflect. At what point do you hold Trump accountable for his actions?

By the way, Syria occured in part due to the distabilization of Iraq, caused by the Iraq war which, I'd bet my bottom dollar, people like yourself happily supported back then as well.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

I don’t remember going to a Costco and seeing a isle marked buy your own failed state country?
I will say Obama may have to take up responsibility for Libya but Syria??? Why Syria?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Why do you see them as justified? Syria hasn't attacked America. Syria is a sovereign nation by any definition. The matters they are facing have nothing to do with America.

Sure, I'm happy to address that, thank you for asking. I'm operating under the assumption that there was a chemical weapons attack on civilians using bleach, of all things, as the primary agent. It is insidious, and it is a human rights violation. We are not an isolationist nation, we don't just say "welp, that's none of our business" when an atrocity happens. The sad thing is that chlorine is a live-saving substance, able to disinfect water and reduces infection by killing bacteria. I see the Assad regime's use of what should be an innocuous, readily available, extremely useful substance as a tool of destruction as intensely malevolent. Using it as an agent of death says to me "go ahead, I dare you." And our President called his bluff. We can supply you with chlorine, but it will be regulated. If you're going to use it to kill people, well you don't deserve the capability to manufacture it. That's the message I received.

Now, we can talk about who may have carried out the attack other than Assad, but I just don't smell a conspiracy here. Assad used the tools he had available, tried to pass it off as a false flag, and paid dearly for it because our President wasn't buying his bullsnip. This is the big stick of Teddy Roosevelt's philosophy. And nobody died! That's the best part! It was a slap on the wrist, a promise given in earnest. I'm looking forward to your reply, friend.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Many here will give Trump a pass on this, even though he has violated the constitution, they won't care if he violates the constitution unless it's an attack on the 2nd amendment .

If I were a gun toting American I would have serious concerns right now about Trump, if this doesn't wake people up I don't know what will.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Many here will give Trump a pass on this,

I'm well aware of that.

a reply to: Zelun

What about all the other atrocities committed across the world why do they go unchecked, why attack Syria and leave all the other countries alone?

Not sure what is really taking place, but I think I'll order a take out pizza for tonights dinner

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Obama owns Libya and Syria.

So Obama is to blame for Trump's own actions in the whitehouse? This is the very definition of the 'thanks Obama' excuse that gets thrown around to deflect. At what point do you hold Trump accountable for his actions?

By the way, Syria occured in part due to the distabilization of Iraq, caused by the Iraq war which, I'd bet my bottom dollar, people like yourself happily supported back then as well.

Syria happened because of the Arab Spring, and Assad using gas on protestors. Which the international community called for action against. Remember the red line? Remember arming rebels that turned into ISIS? The point I'm making is that we were committed to some sort of mission in Syria on humanitarian grounds, up until Obama left office.

So far under Trump, we've had two strikes against Syrian chemical weapons sites. To me that seems pretty reserved. What more do you want, full scale invasion? Neither of us want that. But he is damned if he does or doesn't act.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

Ugh. I respectfully decline to eat the dog poop, though I'm happy to pick it up and put in the proper receptacle.

I'm detecting that your concern is the expense of carrying out a military operation. Those missiles get decommissioned when they get too old. You've already paid for them. I think they were put to good use.

I'm also detecting that you don't think the operation was effective. It was EXTREMELY effective. It proved that Syria's missile defense is pathetic and ineffective. And, here's the kicker, NOBODY DIED! So we told Assad that a) you may not operate with impunity, massacring your population and b) consider yourself on notice, bud.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Easy
The Saudis got Yemen
Israel seems to be taking on the role of well killing anyone that gets in there way in the ME
Russia is doing stuffs in Syria and the Crimea peninsula
France has a itchy finger but others keep beating them to the punch so they provide logistical support for US special forces and our allies.
Australia is having its own Naval issues right now.
China is just in beast mode
Brazil is well Brazil
South Korea and Japan are in a debacle about NK but ultimately want the same thing(I think)
South Africa is a freaking mess
Mexico is doing good but like always having troubles
America has its hand in all the honey pots


Did I miss anything?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

What about all the other atrocities committed across the world why do they go unchecked, why attack Syria and leave all the other countries alone?

Fantastic question. The easy answer is that we just don't have the resources to address every terrible thing happening on the planet, it would bankrupt us. The hard answer is actually a question: "why are we fighting a proxy war in Syria?" The answer isn't good, but it's true. Russia NEEDS a way to capitalize on it's petroleum reserves, and is currently trying to secure a passage through Syria to the Mediterranean. What do you think Afghanistan has always been about? It isn't economical to ship petroleum from a Pacific route, they really want a pipeline through the middle east to the Indian Ocean or Mediterranean Sea. It isn't evil or anything, it's just an organism trying to thrive. But is the human cost worth it?

a reply to: Zelun

Sure, I'm happy to address that, thank you for asking.

I'm not being sarcastic or anything. I appreciate you taking the time to make your case and address my post.

I'm operating under the assumption that there was a chemical weapons attack on civilians using bleach, of all things, as the primary agent.

Key word here is assumption. The evidence is questionable at best. But even if we were to grant you that, again why are we getting involved? This may be a humans rights issue, the political matters in Syria on complex and involve multiple sides with no necessarily good or bad side. At the end of the day military involvement is based on financial and political interest, not of human rights. If you think this is why we bomb other countries abroad you're naive.

our President wasn't buying his bullsnip.

The president isn't buying anything. He's the one being bought.

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: Allaroundyou

Ugh. I respectfully decline to eat the dog poop, though I'm happy to pick it up and put in the proper receptacle.

I'm detecting that your concern is the expense of carrying out a military operation. Those missiles get decommissioned when they get too old. You've already paid for them. I think they were put to good use.

I'm also detecting that you don't think the operation was effective. It was EXTREMELY effective. It proved that Syria's missile defense is pathetic and ineffective. And, here's the kicker, NOBODY DIED! So we told Assad that a) you may not operate with impunity, massacring your population and b) consider yourself on notice, bud.

BWAHAHAHA I like you already. If there are no bags for said poop I will rush some to ya.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

If there are no bags for said poop I will rush some to ya.

Appreciated! Can never have too many doggie bags.