Taking Out Political Leaders

The fat oaf has opened a dangerous new play for his MAGA playbook: preemptively killing those whose views differ from his own.

Of course throughout history the victor would kill the leader of the losing team, typically a king, but this basically changed prior to WWI: the world became more "civilized."

I put that word in quotes because I think the real reason for the change was a mutual recognition by all politicians that it would behoove them all if they stopped trying to kill one another, to let them live and keep in power.

Leave the dying to the soldiers, the civilians but not their leaders.

This means of self preservation has worked pretty well overall, but now Trump wants to take us back to the Olden Times.

With open season on politicians the fat oaf should be very worried...and cautious, lest an adversary target and take him out, e.g. a L.A.W. into his helicopter or Air Force one, or mortar rounds into the white house.

The shit will almost certainly get real.

Quote: missedhervee

The fat oaf has opened a dangerous new play for his MAGA playbook: preemptively killing those whose views differ from his own.

Of course throughout history the victor would kill the leader of the losing team, typically a king, but this basically changed prior to WWI: the world became more "civilized."

I put that word in quotes because I think the real reason for the change was a mutual recognition by all politicians that it would behoove them all if they stopped trying to kill one another, to let them live and keep in power.

Leave the dying to the soldiers, the civilians but not their leaders.

This means of self preservation has worked pretty well overall, but now Trump wants to take us back to the Olden Times.

With open season on politicians the fat oaf should be very worried...and cautious, lest an adversary target and take him out, e.g. a L.A.W. into his helicopter or Air Force one, or mortar rounds into the white house.

The shit will almost certainly get real.

I’ve been having the same thoughts. The ‘good guys’ justify these actions by calling the leaders ‘terrorists’. Using Gaza as an easy example, Hamas was elected by their people. So even if they are ‘terrorists’, they are still FIRST the recognized (by their people) government.

It’s another issue that is not clear which way to go, but I know I don’t want Trump making these decisions.

My problem is we have targeted 2 leaders who are no threat to us with no legal justification. I am not inherently opposed to targeting leaders in a legal war But, both Venezuela and Iran are illegal wars.

The problem with what Trump is doing in Iran is he is removing the current government. And, he is claiming (not sure that it will come true,) there will be no ground campaign. He just wants to remove the government and let a new government take over. This almost always goes wrong. Rarely do stable governments emerge from violence, especially foreign violence. So we removed a stable of corrupt government, in a region full of extremist groups and terrorists, and with close ties to Russia and China, and assume a better government will naturally form?

This is either a poorly thought out operation, or they are planning to do way more than they are publicly announcing.

Quote: Gandler

This is either a poorly thought out operation, or they are planning to do way more than they are publicly announcing.

Same as what I’m wondering. Trump has rarely used the truth to defend anything he does. And he has used plenty of flimsy excuses for declaring immediate action being necessary to prevent or stop some fake or exaggerated crisis of the moment.