Topic: MAGA! It's about time
Anonymous A started this discussion 6 years ago #98,963
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later[^] [v] #1,117,003
HELL YEAH!!
Apocalypse Indy™ !xINDYpXglg joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 31 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,011
Shoot down a boat?
tteh !MemesToDNA joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,016
Might as well sink their planes, for good measure.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,018
Members of the armed forces are obligated to disobey any unlawful orders. Just chalk this up as another thing the Generals will have to clean up.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
tteh !MemesToDNA replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,019
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Nominal requirement to fire warning shots or flairs aside, I don't think sinking an aggressive ship is unlawful, is it? I know absolutely fuck all about this so please do correct me. (I remember reading that it would've been lawful, during the Cod Wars, for the Royal Navy to sink 'attacking' Icelandic Coast Guard vessels.)
(I'm not sure UNCLOS covers sinking planes or downing boats, tho.)
Oh I just realised I'm retarded and you're probably referring to America's ROE! I know even less about that. ?
Nominal requirement to fire warning shots or flairs aside, I don't think sinking an aggressive ship is unlawful, is it? I know absolutely fuck all about this so please do correct me. (I remember reading that it would've been lawful, during the Cod Wars, for the Royal Navy to sink 'attacking' Icelandic Coast Guard vessels.)
(I'm not sure UNCLOS covers sinking planes or downing boats, tho.)
Oh I just realised I'm retarded and you're probably referring to America's ROE! I know even less about that. ?
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 43 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,038
Oh that's right, he needs to misdirect his MAGA minions when he's getting lambasted for his handling of the coronavirus. "We're gonna bomb some ragheads!" is always the most reliable go-to.
Apocalypse Indy™ !tuuKQe.zrY joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,058
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,061
@1,117,019 (tteh !MemesToDNA)
Seconding this, it specifically says Iranian ships that harass ours. You know by this point my opinion of what American foreign policy should be but I don't see how this is illegal. I think it's incredibly stupid and wrong and I 100% don't agree with US ships being anywhere near Iran in the first place, but I don't think it's illegal.
I mean we could go into splitting hairs on what "harass" means in the context of this order. Like if the Iranian ship unfurls a banner saying "Fuck You America" it would be pretty unreasonable to open fire, but if they do stuff like firing at our ships or credibly threatening to do so, that's different.
Seconding this, it specifically says Iranian ships that harass ours. You know by this point my opinion of what American foreign policy should be but I don't see how this is illegal. I think it's incredibly stupid and wrong and I 100% don't agree with US ships being anywhere near Iran in the first place, but I don't think it's illegal.
I mean we could go into splitting hairs on what "harass" means in the context of this order. Like if the Iranian ship unfurls a banner saying "Fuck You America" it would be pretty unreasonable to open fire, but if they do stuff like firing at our ships or credibly threatening to do so, that's different.
Meta !Sober//iZs double-posted this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,062
@1,117,011 (Apocalypse Indy™ !xINDYpXglg)
> Shoot down a boat?
Which direction does a boat go after it's been torpedoed? ???
> Shoot down a boat?
Which direction does a boat go after it's been torpedoed? ???
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 6 years ago, 14 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,068
@1,117,019 (tteh !MemesToDNA)
I mean what does "harassing" mean? If they are looking to ram the ship then yeah.l obviously you can shoot, but if they are just kinda pestering you and staying within Iranian waters, you can't shoot at them. Well you can but that's generally considered an act of war.
@1,117,061 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
I think "firing at" our ships is clearly beyond harassment. The vagueness of the order is classic Trump: it means whatever you want it to mean, taken literally it's probably illegal or something dumb. Trump supporters will never take him literally, even when they would take any other politician saying the exact same thing extremely literally and write long excoriating remarks about how stupid it is.
I mean what does "harassing" mean? If they are looking to ram the ship then yeah.l obviously you can shoot, but if they are just kinda pestering you and staying within Iranian waters, you can't shoot at them. Well you can but that's generally considered an act of war.
@1,117,061 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
I think "firing at" our ships is clearly beyond harassment. The vagueness of the order is classic Trump: it means whatever you want it to mean, taken literally it's probably illegal or something dumb. Trump supporters will never take him literally, even when they would take any other politician saying the exact same thing extremely literally and write long excoriating remarks about how stupid it is.
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 19 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,079
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
National sovereignty/territorial boundaries are basically gone at this point since the United States armed forces have de facto jurisdiction over the entire world. Foreign interventions have pretty broad bipartisan support. I find it pretty difficult to imagine many people in Congress worrying about respecting Iran's territorial boundaries.
I would say "harassment" means some hostile action taken against US naval ships or a credible threat thereof. I'm no naval warfare expert though. It's important to note this tweet isn't the actual order. I would think some Navy admirals made up a proper order with all the necessary legal stuff and details taken care of for Trump to sign.
Just like the executive orders. Go read literally any executive order. No way did Trump write that shit. He says "I want an executive order that says X" and then his people write it up in the proper legal language. I think it's the same with this. He tells the Navy people "I want an order to shoot down Iranian ships harassing ours" and they go and write it up properly with all the necessary details.
National sovereignty/territorial boundaries are basically gone at this point since the United States armed forces have de facto jurisdiction over the entire world. Foreign interventions have pretty broad bipartisan support. I find it pretty difficult to imagine many people in Congress worrying about respecting Iran's territorial boundaries.
I would say "harassment" means some hostile action taken against US naval ships or a credible threat thereof. I'm no naval warfare expert though. It's important to note this tweet isn't the actual order. I would think some Navy admirals made up a proper order with all the necessary legal stuff and details taken care of for Trump to sign.
Just like the executive orders. Go read literally any executive order. No way did Trump write that shit. He says "I want an executive order that says X" and then his people write it up in the proper legal language. I think it's the same with this. He tells the Navy people "I want an order to shoot down Iranian ships harassing ours" and they go and write it up properly with all the necessary details.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
dreamworks joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,081
but the us is the one harassing iran
Meta !Sober//iZs replied with this 6 years ago, 45 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,082
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 38 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,089
@1,117,068 (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> I mean what does "harassing" mean? If they are looking to ram the ship then yeah.l obviously you can shoot, but if they are just kinda pestering you and staying within Iranian waters, you can't shoot at them. Well you can but that's generally considered an act of war.
Trump is just using well known Jewish tactics. It's the old "Don't throw rocks at tanks, Palestinian kids" and then they get shot in the face if they do.
> I mean what does "harassing" mean? If they are looking to ram the ship then yeah.l obviously you can shoot, but if they are just kinda pestering you and staying within Iranian waters, you can't shoot at them. Well you can but that's generally considered an act of war.
Trump is just using well known Jewish tactics. It's the old "Don't throw rocks at tanks, Palestinian kids" and then they get shot in the face if they do.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 6 years ago, 13 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,092
Anonymous K replied with this 6 years ago, 23 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,100
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
Inevitable thing. The next dingy that gets too close to a battleship gets sunk.
Inevitable thing. The next dingy that gets too close to a battleship gets sunk.
Green !StaYqkzUPc joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,132
And the price of oil has sharply risen! Quite a coincidence...
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 26 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,147
Duhhhr I moderate a chatchan I can easily second guess The Commander in Chief of The United States of America.
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 10 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,251
The Pentagon says they received no such order lol
> Three U.S. defense officials told NBC News they were caught off guard by the tweet because the president had not ordered a change in the policy or rules of engagement.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/trump-tweets-order-destroy-iranian-boats-pentagon-calls-it-warning-n1189876
> Three U.S. defense officials told NBC News they were caught off guard by the tweet because the president had not ordered a change in the policy or rules of engagement.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/trump-tweets-order-destroy-iranian-boats-pentagon-calls-it-warning-n1189876
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,257
chill dog !!81dzJNNYL replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,117,260
@previous (B)
Way to ignore everything that doesn't fit into your incredibly narrow worldview. It really shows how well-informed you are.
Way to ignore everything that doesn't fit into your incredibly narrow worldview. It really shows how well-informed you are.