|
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-has-already-killed-more-civilians-obama-us-fight-against-isis-653564
So much winning.
~Hivebent4Life
3DS FC: 5069-3910-2647 |
|
"During @BarackObama's 29 months at helm of ISIS war we tracked 855 alleged civilian casualty events which likely killed 2298-3398 civilians," Airwars tweeted to the group's official account.
"In @realDonaldTrump's first 7 months as President, we tracked 1,196 alleged incidents in which we assess at least 2,819-4,529 civilians died," it added. Added for clarification. It was over the last 2 1/2 years of Obama's term, not the entire 8 years.
Here at Globo Gym we're better than you, and we know it!
|
|
not to defend Trump, but my guess would be because big cities are starting to be retaken from ISIS, and this is obviously where the most civilian casualties would occur.
* * * * - Die Nummer 1 der Welt sind wir.
If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. |
|
ALIEN_WORK2HOP posted...
not to defend Trump, but my guess would be because big cities are starting to be retaken from ISIS, and this is obviously where the most civilian casualties would occur. If you look at the numbers though, using the midpoint of the ranges provided, Obama averaged about 3.3 per incident and Trump, 3.07. |
|
The article doesn't mention how many terrorists taken out by each President. Maybe the globalist shills running Newseek omitted that information on purpose...
REFUGEES WELCOME!
https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/408- |
|
ShroomKingJr posted...
The article doesn't mention how many terrorists taken out by each President. Maybe the globalist shills running Newseek omitted that information on purpose... Yup. I bet they also don't take into account how many people over there the terrorist themselves are killing. A dead terrorist can't rape, kidnap, or kill other innocent civilians Newsweek supposedly cares so much about.
Tha anti-myth rhythm rock shocker...
|
|
@BlazBBQ posted...
@ShroomKingJr posted...The article doesn't mention how many terrorists taken out by each President. Maybe the globalist shills running Newseek omitted that information on purpose... You two are no different than BAMN. |
|
TheCrock2k4 posted...
Added for clarification. It was over the last 2 1/2 years of Obama's term, not the entire 8 years. lol @ TC obviously lying. and yeah, Obama ignored ISIS for a while. He called them Jr. Varsity and ignored the fact they were committing terrorism, enslaving children, throwing gays off roofs, etc.
MAGA.
|
|
The article says three years. Which if I'm not mistaken is significantly more than eight months.
Moustache twirling villian
http://i.imgur.com/uV2Wf1H.jpg- Kerbey |
|
BobGeorge posted...
Hey, everyone, the anti-war left is back! We sure missed you guys these last 8 years. lol, indeed. remember, many of their esteemed politicians voted for the war in iraq (and are still prominent in the party) but they pretend it never happened.
MAGA.
|
|
BlazBBQ posted...
ShroomKingJr posted...The article doesn't mention how many terrorists taken out by each President. Maybe the globalist shills running Newseek omitted that information on purpose... Well, they also don't tell how many surviving civilian members of these attacks then go up and join ISIS either.
I will try and see it from your point of view, but I doubt we'll be able to fit both our heads up there.
|
|
Record breaking.
My Mario Maker Levels
https://supermariomakerbookmark.nintendo.net/profile/untrustful?type=posted |
|
BobGeorge posted...
Hey, everyone, the anti-war left is back! We sure missed you guys these last 8 years. You're in a topic that shows Trump using approximately four to five times as many attacks as Obama (if the trend continues) and you're arguing that Obama wasn't anti-war.... Edit: did my math thinking Trump was in for a whole year. He's actually on track to do 8 times as many attacks as Obama.
"Hodor" -Hodor
|
|
Hilarious that Dems can sit there and pretend their party is anti-war or give a damn about civilian deaths when senators that supported the iraq war remained prominent after or even today:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm Diane Feinstein Joe Biden Christopher Dodd John Kerry Hillary Clinton Chuck Schumer Harry Reid John Edwards Tom Daschle House Dems who were/are still big players in the party: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm Blagojevich Weiner Schiff
MAGA.
|
|
BobGeorge posted...
Welcommatt posted...You're in a topic 8 times more, dude. Or in reverse, Obama had 1/8 as many events that killed civilians every month. Here, let me show you the math, since I'm guessing you didn't get it. Obama: 855 events in 29 months Trump: 1,196 in 7 months Obama: 855/29 =21.5 events per month Trump: 1,196/7 =171 events per month 171/21.5=8 8 times as many attacks PER MONTH 171 X 48 = 8,208 events total 8,208/855 = 10 10 times as many attacks total. And this is before Trump going back into Afghanistan. "Huurr they supported Obama and he was SO pro-war"
"Hodor" -Hodor
|
|
Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force.
A wise man once said "Speak softly, but carry a big stick" Trump has already proven his loud voice and small stick.
"Hodor" -Hodor
|
|
Welcommatt posted...
BobGeorge posted...Welcommatt posted...You're in a topic What do you mean 'going back into Afghanistan'? We never left. There's been combat operations going on for 15 years.
Here at Globo Gym we're better than you, and we know it!
|
|
zeppelin4ever42 posted...
And that's how you get insurgents. Do you want insurgents? *Looks at Japan* |
|
Welcommatt posted...
Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force. Based on the article, Trump killed roughly 3 civilians per attack on average. Obama killed 3.7. Looks like Trump is doing better at commanding than Obama, and he is not even using drones so much as actual airstrikes.
[=[_]=] (+.|__|.+) PS3 (Persona 5)
[+[_]+] 3DS (Ace Attorney Investigations: Prosecutor's Path) |
|
Butthead24 posted...
It'd be interesting to see how they are confirming these numbers... https://airwars.org/ |
|
infinitys_7th posted...
Welcommatt posted...Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force. Counting the number of events doesn't better represent the ability to avoid civilian casualties? Are you an idiot?
"Hodor" -Hodor
|
|
Welcommatt posted...
infinitys_7th posted...Welcommatt posted...Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force. Do you understand what "efficiency" means? Total numbers are less important than rates. The US coalition is undertaking much more aggressive action against ISIS now, but it is more efficient at killing ISIS members and not civilains. Your statement: Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force. is wrong as Obama's "better command" killed more civilains per action. Obama was less efficient, and considering his and Bush's policies created ISIS he was making more of a mess of the mess he helped make.
[=[_]=] (+.|__|.+) PS3 (Persona 5)
[+[_]+] 3DS (Ace Attorney Investigations: Prosecutor's Path) |
|
Welcommatt posted...
Obama was actually able to do attacks that didn't kill civilians. He was better at working with the generals and commanding the armed forces, yet he preferred not to use force. Not one President we've had really since WW2 has actually carried that idea out. Stay the f*** out of Foreign affairs. If the rest of the world goes to hell, let them. If rest of the world wants to f*** itself and the Reich is killing people, the most important thing to do is condemn all the violence and declare neutrality. But, carry a big stick- ready to smash any upstarts who think it's funny to hit us because we neutral... well then, hope you like the airborne massacre heading your way. |
No comments:
Post a Comment