More shitposts. You literally have zero concept of policy which didn't change during office.
Did Trump sanction Russia in regards to Crimea, did Trump break nuclear treaty with Russia, did Trump prompt more Nato spending, did Trump supply arms to Ukraine, did Ukraine take more or less of its Eastern region during his office. Did Trump attempt sanctions on Nord Stream.
But there you are like a nigger thinking there was some other politics because of some other phonecall. Did you want a carrot? Or the stick?
I really should avoid shitposts. They're clickbait. I am saying policy didn't change, look the above facts, not shenanigans. It is what it is.
Taiwan isn't Ukraine. Taking it, potentially goes hot. Nukes. Because they'd have to completely dominate the South China Sea, by firing on strike groups. But if they're attempting, it would have to be favourable, either during a larger collapse, or from a larger diversion. China isn't Russia. It hasn't won many wars. It tends to only win them from advantage. Taiwan an island is much heavier fortified, taking it, becomes political, or it cripples defenses flattening most of the population in the process on an island. Hot.
Theatre they keep the press spinning nothing else. Sometimes they cause support for whichever band is playing whistle to the voters as any politics align into policy. Occasionally they might reel rivals in, by playing favourites and causing deals.
But okay let's suggest there's some other justice towards any allegations which are largely in the realms of conspiracy and hearsay, sometimes in political oppostion. Would any supposed result be better or worse? Is this why a sitting president has never been indicted. Rather any policy shifted as result of supposed impeachment, or resignation.
But you're having a gag if you think, right now, pandemic, recession, conflict, competition; America will simply slice its two feet off, but it wasn't playing at another angle.
Yea undoubtedly back at home they buy into it, because it sells.
But it's superficial. What does it have to do with how policy has shaped. The answer is practically nothing. NATO is a treaty. Americans profiting what's new. But but. Who cares. You mean OMG OMG quick impeach? Yeah go figure.
Exposing Biden for what exactly? I must have missed that memo. I don't think the senate got it either. You meant here comes Durham leading the light brigade. Nope. Isn't he a reservist with a bugle. If it all goes sideways? Correct the record, retreat.
Although let's entertain the idea where anybody could've predicted what's happening currently. Does it make it conspiratorial. Or an occurrence?
No conspiracy, national secrets. An occurrence where any policy would've been largely the same formulation.
Nope. You're Unamerican for not supporting existing treaty's and commitments. Deterrence dumb ass. I hated his bullshit too.
Play the scenario where a Nato member is attacked. President already has authorization. Do reiterate what you're undermining? Policy. Not the presidency. It is seditious.
Deployment here is deterrence. It isn't direct deployment because no lawmakers would authorise it. Outside of limited defense, aid, and sanctions. They'd faster have no control.
In any event the mudslinging continues. Although putting it out as why go there, and why not stay at home. He might as well have interviewed a cuckoo or a traitor or asked another crackhead. It wouldn't make any difference. Deployment to existing treaty, above, if attacked has authorization. Bolstering those ranks is therefore deterrence.
Sure argue some other conspiracy. Tediously.
Yawn. This subject matter is getting real tedious, real fast. Nobody cares. Outside of pointless gossip. Still nobody cares. Pointless politics of more midterm Bullshit. The cavalry is coming, it will in a crisis, impede.
What charges? The ones you made up. You meant some other unlawful conspiracy.
You obviously do not understand the gravity of the situation. Instead you must think you have a choice. Tell me what you think it is?
Incase you missed the actual headlines Russia has invaded Ukraine. Did you think there is supposed impeachment? Do you think next election will care?
Clearly direct intervention wasn't granted.
Supporting intervention in Europe isn't fully upto any lawmarkers. The president commands the army. It has existing commitments and treaties. Lawmakers aren't cancelling treaty's. They authorise war, within some reasons often already specified, and the sale of arms, and sanctions.
Bemoaning further deployment, who cares what rag says what. It wouldn't make any difference.
Perhaps but infectious disease isn't.
Let's agree to disagree. That person, hate these types, but there they are in germ season coughing, sneezing, snot drooling down their chin. Avoid or snog? On that premise. Does a mask prevent some heavy particles. Not enough to stop transmission. Possibly enough to avoid some immediate risk if you passed on by where there was that infectious person. A failed premise when engaged on a disease that was largely asymptomatic. A failed premise when deployed in enclosed proximity for extended durations. A failed premise when they cause illness. A failed premise when symptomatic are supposed to isolate.
Prior to this pandemic. There was no legislation on doctors, or nurses going into practice with the flu. There still isn't in most places. I find it to be the most intolerable of all.
No bitch. You're dumber than dixie, at least she turns tricks. You're a yokel.