The president has a complete 'meltdown' today following a Congressional vote

a reply to: xuenchen

Not Hard for Someone to Snap After Mentally Snapping when they Reach 50 Years of Age . Especially Females ........)

a reply to: DanDanDat

Infrastructure? "Blame my partisan villain of choice."

Why won't McConnell hold votes on bills already passed by the House?

War? "Here are all the reasons we need to keep fighting"

We weren't exactly "at war" in Syria, but offering support. But hey, we're "bringin' em home," right? Nope, just redeploying them in the region while a tinderbox ignites because of a stupid decision by a stupid man influenced by dictators. So we might actually have to fight, now.

We use to call people who made arguments like that war mongers.

We were not "at war" in Syria.

Perhaps I have to rethink my belief that its the liberals among us that will move us into a prosperous future; they are proving to be too short sighted to ever make good on their ideals.

Mirror, Mirror.

a reply to: Liquesence

If this isn't war; I'd hate to see what war is.

Listen I get it; you don't like Donald Trump; and if more people have to die by our hands just so he can get what's coming to him so be it ... am I right?

a reply to: Oraculi

A number of those “representatives” were on the final election ballot by jungle primaries designed to favor one party over the other. How is that democratically elected?

The original intention of the House and Senate was that the House represents the people of a state and the Senators represent the state itself. Do we still have a bicameral legislation if both humps are the same?

And finally, if Congress has not called forth the militia into a sanctioned state of declared war, how is trying to control troop movements (an exclusive power of the Executive Branch) not an attempt to usurp powers not designated?

a reply to: underwerks

sigh in no way shape or form are those b61 gravity bombs to either Russia or turkey . turkey does want nukes but they arent getting ours www.thedrive.com...

The United States has had those weapons forward-deployed at Incirlik since the Cold War as part of a broader nuclear response plan throughout NATO. There are between 150 and 200 total B61s deployed between Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Turkey is the only host country that is not part of the alliance's nuclear sharing agreement, which gives the other countries involved access to these weapons, in close coordination with the United States, during a crisis. So, there are no aircraft actually based in Turkey that could deliver the weapons in a crisis.

and we would level the base if they tried after we disabled the weapons

It's important to note that there are a number of security measures in place that mitigates the most immediate risks to the B61s, such as someone attempting to steal one and set it off. Each bomb has a coded lock mechanism known as a Permissive Action Link (PAL) that requires a unique 12-digit code in order to arm it. Handlers can also render them inert using a different command disable code. That's not to say that there aren't risks, including that someone could fashion the weapons into some form of a dirty bomb, as well as the general security nightmare that would result from any loose nuclear weapons, not to mention the national embarrassment.

so unless turkey wants to try to turn them into dirty bombs of which the response in kind would not go well for turkey article goes on to say this

On the other hand, you can't simply steal a B61 nuclear bomb and use it as you wish. The fusing system is protected by a code mechanism called a Permissive Action Link (PAL). The codes needed to authorize their activation have to be provided by the National Command Authority. The weapons also must be continuously maintained to be combat effective. These nuclear gravity bombs also feature a command disable mode which allows handlers to disable the weapon in fairly quick order. This is done by entering the right code to activate the bomb’s thermal battery, which also detaches the bomb’s control handle in the process. The battery overheats and fries the weapons electronics, thus making the weapon incapable of triggering its nuclear warhead. Supposedly, the B-61 must be sent back to depot for a complete overhaul in order for it to be capable of functioning normally once again after a command disable action, although there are differing theories as to just how hard it would be for a very dedicated entity, especially a state actor, to get the weapon in working order once again. Some say it is quite possible. If under an imminent threat of seizure, the facility’s security teams and the vaults that the bombs are held in could give technicians time to attempt to disable the weapons via the command disable function. If executed, and all the weapons were rendered useless, at least temporarily, even threatening the technicians directly to bring them back online would be a useless exercise. The value of the actual warhead’s nuclear material is also debatable, as designing a weapon around it would require great know-how and testing would likely be required. Regardless, the weapons could be fashioned into crude but potentially very deadly dirty bombs. The truth is, that if the base were seized, the US would likely attempt to flatten it before the weapons were able to be dispersed, but doing so would be unprecedented on a massive scale and it would take time to accomplish. A mission would likely have to originate out of the Middle East, the continental US, or using tactical aircraft out of Europe, although they would have to be able to carry sufficient “bunker busters” (BLU-109 equipped JDAMs, GBU-24/27) to strike all 21 storage vaults located at Incirlik. As we saw in Benghazi, tactical aircraft are not held at a high-readiness for strike operations in the region, and especially not equipped at the ready with bunker busters. The idea of a country stealing nuclear weapons from the US has long been a staple of pop culture fascination, but the reality is far less sensational. Still, an incident where American nuclear weapons security was directly threatened could be a massive geopolitical failure for the United States, and if they were to fall into someone else’s hands, even those of a close former ally, it would be devastating to American credibility abroad, regardless of if they can actually be used or not."

so its more the loss of face in the attempt then actual risk of the devices falling into the wild but sure go with the statemnt you made of "were handing nukes to turky and russia" geez seems people have some kind of fettish about russia who other then her large nuclear arsenal is not the threat it was in the cold war days at least to us. nations like ukraine and their neighbors now that would be a different matter but us? baring full on nuclear war russia isnt a threat these days (and if that happens were all dead any ways lol)

originally posted by: DanDanDat
a reply to: Liquesence

If this isn't war; I'd hate to see what war is.

Listen I get it; you don't like Donald Trump; and if more people have to die by our hands just so he can get what's coming to him so be it ... am I right?

2018. You realize Trump authorized those strikes, right? The ones you linked to that killed civilians. To "defeat ISIS."

Now the situation is (or was) more or less stabilized. Now it's not. Now it all happens again, and our allies against ISIS are killed. Because of a stupid decision.

originally posted by: DanDanDat
a reply to: Liquesence

If this isn't war; I'd hate to see what war is.

Listen I get it; you don't like Donald Trump; and if more people have to die by our hands just so he can get what's coming to him so be it ... am I right?

trump is killing Kurds, our allies against ISIS, by abandoning them to the turks. Do you get that?

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yes. They could have boots on the ground in days if they wanted to.

All they have to do is vote to declare war on Syria.

Ummm...wouldn't they be declaring war on...Turkey...?

I mean...it's the Kurdish allies they're all frothing over supporting...not the Turkish allies...


What does Syria have to do with that scenario...other than the fact this is all taking place on Syrian Soil...





YouSir

a reply to: underwerks

do you need a frigging geography lesson? they aren't attacking inclirk they were bracketing our bases in SYRIA not turkey. we do not nor to my knowledge have we ever had nuclear weapons in syria ,but it is more evidence for us to re think our alliance with the turks

a reply to: YouSir

Point taken.

a reply to: Liquesence

For the same reason that Harry Reid wouldn't during the Obama years?

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DanDanDat
a reply to: Liquesence

If this isn't war; I'd hate to see what war is.

Listen I get it; you don't like Donald Trump; and if more people have to die by our hands just so he can get what's coming to him so be it ... am I right?

2018. You realize Trump authorized those strikes, right? The ones you linked to that killed civilians. To "defeat ISIS."

Now the situation is (or was) more or less stabilized. Now it's not. Now it all happens again, and our allies against ISIS are killed. Because of a stupid decision.

Do I realize that Trump authorized those strikes? Yes, he was president in 2018. That seems like one of those things most people can agree on; So why make a point that goes with out saying?

Unlike you I don't form my political and moral opinions based on what Trump does or does not do. My feelings (love or hate or indifference) for the President are irrelevant to such opinions. He's just a boorish man who will be gone from our lives sooner or later; I plan to be around a lot longer than that.

War is one of those things that transcends the person who might be temperamentally occupying the oval office and since war is bad (something I use to think most people agreed with) we should always be happy to end our involvement in it around the world no matter who orders it be done.... but I maybe wrong, Trump may be so offensive to some that crying for war just to spite him sounds like a good idea.

Nancy Pelosi Twitter is turning into a click-clown fest 😃

Getting us the hell out of Syria is something I've been praying for since Trump won the election.

We shouldn't have been there in the first place. The US committed a war crime by creating ISIS in the first place, and a large swatch of those very same congress people should probably be on trial at the Hauge right now because of the Syrian War. So yes, end the damn thing.

I can't find any polls about how Americans overall feel, but Breitbart reported on a poll of Republicans.

57% of Republicans support Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria, while only 26% oppose it. 18% didn't care. So, the actual party supports this by a 2 to 1 margin.

a reply to: Liquesence

www.cnbc.com... they tried they wanted trump to get rid of his tax cuts to do it but hey at least both sides tried even if it was unlikely to pass with that cavat as well as trump wanting them to ok funding for his wall (dems wont budge on this one)

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., had also cast doubt on the success of the meeting. “I don’t think their meeting will go very well,” McCarthy said minutes before the talks were scheduled to start. “No matter what you do on infrastructure” it has to be bipartisan, McCarthy said. “And they’re walking into a meeting today saying you have to change the tax cuts to the American public and raise taxes on the American public if they were to go along with an infrastructure bill. I think that’s a loss.”

so that is a member of the houses response to it

transportation.house.gov... seperate bill i think but this is what was agreed to be passed
1

H.Con.Res. 16 – Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers Memorial Service and the National Honor Guard and Pipe Band Exhibition (Rep. Dina Titus) H.Con.Res. 16 authorizes the use of the Capitol Grounds for the National Peace Officers Memorial Service (to honor law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty in 2018) and the National Honor Guard and Pipe Band Exhibition (to provide for law enforcement from around the country to exhibit their ability to demonstrate Honor Guard programs and provide for a bagpipe exhibition).

eh ambivalent on this one

2

H.Con.Res. 19 – Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby (Rep. Steny Hoyer) H.Con.Res. 19 authorizes the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington Soap Box Derby, which allows children to demonstrate their dedication, work, and creativity as they compete for trophies.

ohhh wooopie soap box derbys

3.

H.R. 1331 – Local Water Protection Act (Rep. Angie Craig) H.R. 1331 authorizes $200 million annually through FY2024 for the nonpoint source management grants program administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. This program helps States develop and implement their own programs for managing nonpoint sources of water pollution, including runoff that can carry pollutants, such as fertilizers and sediment from fields, toxins from abandoned mines, and oils and heavy metals from roads, into lakes, rivers, and other bodies of water.

this one seems like a good cause though so good for this at least

4.

H.R. 639 – To amend section 327 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to clarify that National Urban Search and Rescue Response System task forces may include Federal employees (Rep. Vicky Hartzler) H.R. 639 is a technical correction that would amend section 327 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to explicitly clarify that Federal employees are allowed to participate in the National Urban Search and Rescue Response System task forces, which are coordinated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

this one seems mostly common sense not even sure why they needed this unless it was some how releated to posse comatatus

www.scmagazine.com... ities-that-could-allow-hackers-to-access-the-energy-grid/ this one seems to have bipartisan support though to protect energy infrastructure

www.politico.com... least we got rid of riders for these kind of things tell 2021

GOP leaders are celebrating the prohibition on partisan riders and see it as a “big selling point” in winning over fiscal conservatives, who are loath to increase the already $1 trillion federal deficit with spending hikes for domestic programs. “Preventing these poison pills are key to the deal because that provision will allow President Trump to continue putting in place conservative policies through executive orders and regulations, and that fact has been a big selling point as our members decide whether to support it or not,” a senior House GOP aide said on background. Republicans say the agreement preserves the Hyde Amendment prohibition on using federal funds for abortion, even though House spending leaders left that long-standing provision intact while writing spending bills earlier this year. “We know that some on the far left had been hankering to claw back Hyde Amendment protections, or cut away at reprogramming authorities and flexibility that presidents rightly possess,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the floor Tuesday. The fiscal 2020 funding bills crafted by House Democrats this spring sought to reverse the Trump administration’s family planning rule, which would halt the flow of federal funding to Planned Parenthood, and bar another rule allowing health care providers to refuse services on the basis of their religious beliefs. The bills would have prevented the administration from pursuing a legal push to eliminate Obamacare, block the removal of references to climate change from agency publications, and prohibit funding transfers to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for more detention beds or deportation efforts. House Democrats also sought to rescind $601 million in fiscal 2019 funding for border wall construction — the same amount of money that Trump said he would shift out of the Treasury Forfeiture Fund earlier this year. After congressional leaders unveiled the budget deal on Monday, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) swiftly rejected it, saying it left Democrats unable to stop Trump from shifting cash toward priorities like building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. But the Senate spending leader later stressed that he would support the bill, despite his concerns. Trump is expected to sign the two-year deal which would suspend the debt ceiling through July 2021 and raise spending for military and non-military programs by $320 billion above the budget caps.

what they want is to hamstring trumps agenda and policy which is why its good the riders aspect seems to be gone now

news.bloombergenvironment.com... this is from the senate

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Oraculi

originally posted by: underwerks
*patiently waits for any of those soldiers to actually come home instead of just being moved somewhere else in the middle east..

Yes, that would be something. Since they are not coming home and we are selling 3,000 US troops to the King of Saudi Arabia, chances are those US troops from Syria got relocated and now work for the King. King of SA writes the check to the White House, White House writes the checks to the troops.

Mercenary army for hire.

War on Syrian soil good, Troops on Saudi Soil bad. I wonder what besides hate drives your opinions.

Well said Sir

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Oraculi

If so many representatives want the US military involved in Syria, then they should vote to declare war.

Simple.

Why? With a scant 200 troops, and the mere threat of the U.S. backing their allied Kurds, we held Turkey at bay. And that could have continued. And in fact, they were working on tearing down barriers and forming a peace. Why could that path not have continued instead? Our troops were not "in danger." Obviously Trump didn't actually care about bringing troops home, because he sent 10 times as many right back over to the middle east. Why can't Saudi solve its own problems if Syria, Turkey and Russia can?

Trump has instilled this bizarre desire to literally hole the U.S. up in its own territory, kick out anyone who is not utterly 100% American in every way (and predominantly white), in what is today a global world. This is not a sound or smart strategy. You actually can decrease military spending, help bring more troops home, while still having a global footprint. Why is it with Trump and his minions that there is no actual solution? It's all or nothing?

That's little league.. amateur hour. What can you expect from a non-politician reality TV real estate mogul, I guess. He is out of his element, and as I said before he took office, has the foreign political savvy of a potato. Yet his civvy troops support him, and think his way is the only way. It's a pity none who blindly support the guy, can't also be critical of his more stupid mistakes. He is not Jesus, he actually is not perfect, hard to believe, but it's true.

The 354 politicians represent the Military Industrial Complex. It shows just how much influence they have in Washington DC. We must continue these pointless wars at all costs.

Trump should really stick it to them, declare the war on Terror officially over, bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. Just don't go riding in a convertible in Dallas any time soon after doing that.

a reply to: fleabit

I'd reply respectfully, but then you went full-on racist and. . .well, stupid.

So instead?

You get a unicorn.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: shooterbrody

Yes. They could have boots on the ground in days if they wanted to.

All they have to do is vote to declare war on Syria.

Congress "declares" war but the president is the commander and chief.