No text of the agreement is available, and it has not yet been finalized,

LOL

I wonder if this will end up being another Turkey situation prior to the Cuban missile crisis.

Not sure how Russia will react to Piggy putting missiles there

If this "deal" is anything like our "deal" with Venezuela, Denmark should run

If you haven't heard we are

1. Taking revenue from Venezuela's sale of oil, gold and other natural resources and possibly other resources
2. Putting them in undisclosed financial institutions, reporting was the money initially went to Qatari banks
3. There is no audit of the money. We, ie. Congress has no idea where the money is, how much money is there, how much is going back to Venezuela, how much is going to third parties. ie the Piggy family
4. Our Defense Department, contrary to law has entered an agreement with famously corrupt Venezuelan businessman (investigated by multiple countries for money laundering) to develop the "oil industry" in Venezuela. If you don't understand how bad it is for the DoD to have a source of income separate from Congress I don't know what to say
5. The corrupt Venezuelan regime remains in place, remains oppressive and remains illegitimate
6. The people of Venezuela hate this arrangement

Sooooo, when Venezuelan "terrorists" start attacking American interests please take your outrage and shove it.

Oh yeah we continue to murder their citizens with impunity.

So, Piggy who literally lies about everything announces some "deal" on Untruth Social and people believe him

TFF

1. Piggy Lies about EVERYTHING
2. This is the exact same deal we had with Denmark for literal decades
3. The military did not want any other bases on Greenland. We are able to complete our mission on Greenland as it is.
4. Greenland is incredibly inhospitable. Thus the cost of a new base would be exorbitant, and, again, would serve no purpose

Again, there is zero reason to believe this. Piggy is desperate for good news ahead of the election.

Here's hoping the thought that some trans kid's life is ruined is worth it.

I hope that thought keeps you warm at night when you are homeless

Here's hoping you starve

For the record none of this would have happened if Harris was present

You dumb -----

Point and laugh at the magat scum

Enjoy your bankruptcy and government soup

Bitch

Nut soon enough

So what?
I'm saying it shouldn't.
And this isn't some opinion I suddenly developed.
I've been saying for years that when Falwell's Moral Majority and Reagan joined forces around the 1980 election with evangelicals supplying political power for Republicans, and Falwell moving evangelical Christianity, and himself in particular, directly into organized national politics, religion and politics made a deal with the devil.
I believed mixing the two was dangerous then, and I believe it now.
So this isn't about which political side is currently benefiting from religion. My objection is to the mixture itself.
#66 | Posted by BillJohnson a

Yet you vote for and support the fatted golden idol president. You know, the cult leader

You freaking bought his bible for freaking out loud

America can't play favorites with religions.

America plays favorites all the ------- time, from Muslim bans to representatives doing a prayer circle on the floor of the House to taking an oath on the bible to federal observance of religious holidays to blue laws to the SC saying we are a christian nation

Muslim organizations in America are already actively invoking religious-liberty laws to protect and advance their religious rights.

You mean they are following the example of christians over the past decades?

You're a idiot AND a bigot

Be very careful what power you give religion through government, because you don't get to decide that only YOUR religion gets to use it.
So...again...drop your religious crap.

#59 | Posted by BillJohnson

And YET the biggest liberty case decided by the SC disregarded the strongly held beliefs of many "religious" people and those non-religious like myself to strip women of their right to an abortion.

---- you and your religious beliefs.

Get them ALL out of the public sphere.

You are a plague upon the land

This topic makes me think of Dolly Parton.

I have zero idea as to what the great Ms. Parton's religious beliefs were.

I SUSPECT she was a very religious person.

But you didn't hear her talk about her religion. I cannot say ever as I do not know every utterance from her decades of public life

But she acted with humility and kindness and generosity to all and I mean ALL people.

Seemingly the way christian teaching say people should act.

Zed,
"I am anxious for SOME moral code to be applied to governance."
Whose moral code?
Of course laws reflect moral judgments. Laws about murder, theft, fraud, abuse, and many others rest partly on judgments about right and wrong.
But that is different from government adopting a particular religious or moral code and imposing it on everyone.
After 250 years, many of the broad rules necessary for an orderly society are already part of our legal system. What we are increasingly arguing about now are the harder questions where legitimate values conflict, individual rights collide, and reasonable people disagree about what government should be allowed to force on society.
Legitimate and perceived rights increasingly overlap and conflict. That is where constitutional boundaries become much harder to navigate, and where the courts are often called upon to determine whether government has crossed those boundaries or whether one person's claimed rights unlawfully infringe upon the rights of another.
And that is exactly why I resist the idea that either conservatives or liberals should become the nation's moral standard-bearer.
My moral beliefs guide me. How I conduct my life is between me and God.
They do not automatically give me the right to make everyone else live by them, nor should anyone else's moral beliefs automatically be imposed on me.

#53 | Posted by BillJohnson

No you obtuse turd, zed is referring to the FACT that the current administration and their magat scum supporters and acting upon no observable moral code. they are grifters and nihilists and sadists one and all.

Zed is imploring that they act in SOME way moral, you know, NOT in mean spirited self-interest

I've been saying all along it is a long shot that the dems actually control the house let alone the senate come Jan. 2027

Just observe how the Magat scum are acting. They are acting like they know the fix is in.

Well danforth even I would have to agree that your dead grandma should not be voting.

Zed,
"Politics should be the application of positive values in the service of facts."
Religion is based on morality.
Politics is about governing people with different beliefs, values, and interests through law, not through a single moral code.
That is exactly why mixing the two creates conflict.
What I may believe is morally right before God is not automatically something I believe government should impose on everyone else.

#33 | Posted by BillJohnson

Religion is not based on morality

Religion is based on control

Religion only occasionally intersects with morality, usually unintentionally

Politics is about governing people through a single moral code-the single moral code being that moral code agreed on by the people, or by the dictator in certain countries where his moral code is dictated to the people.

Post 25 offends me to my core though I am happy the arrogant ---- allows the woman the choice

U.S. bunker buster missiles are unlikely to completely penetrate and destroy the deepest underground chambers of Iran's Pickaxe Mountain.

So when the oil prices were declining back to pre-conflict levels before the Yemen front opened, their Hormuz only strategy was not working. Right?

#87 | Posted by sitzkrieg

No it was the oil markets acting irrationally

Thinking Piggy had a strategy to end the conflict

Your evidence of us winning is Iran's ability to expand the conflict?

Ok

How come you don't answer my simple question

People really underestimate how much firepower we can bring to bear given the political will.
America doesn't have the political will to actually use its firepower unless pushed to the extreme.

#77 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Please explain how all of our firepower would achieve a strategic end

You won', cause you can't

Iran has their military resources buried under 30+ nuke safe mountains. So we ain't gonna harm them

You saying we will carpet bomb civilian infrastructure and housing?

Since we can't touch their missile and drone resources, what reaction will that cause?

Since our supply of stand off munitions is limited and depleting, how will Americans react when we start losing pilots who have to get closer to the targets to attack thus making them more vulnerable?

As for being the "Democrat President that Surrendered to Iran", that's a non-starter obviously and would be worse optics than the Biden run departure from Afghanistan. We'll starve most of Iran to death before that happens.

#78 | Posted by sitzkrieg

You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Iran has many borders and shipping lanes and rail lines open to friendly countries that we cannot or will not touch.

Iran ain't gonna starve

BTW you think the war will last till 2029? WOW

I guess there would be no catastrophic results of that happening.

"Iran already took the worst we could.."
No, no the ---- they didn't lol.
"Blockade-isn't working"
The Yemen front reopened because the blockade is working and oil flows through Hormuz were going up as Iran's ability to project force into the Strait continued to deteriorate.

#76 | Posted by sitzkrieg

Oh, I see, I wasn't aware Iran had surrendered and the strait was open and the oil was flowing! good news!

Or maybe just possibly Iran is causing harm in reaction to the blockade. You know like shutting down SA's oil pipeline.

Oil prices surging means Iran's strategy is working.

I aww you refuse to answer my simple question.

I guess it does look like whitney houston a tad