Trump's Shameful Pardons for War Criminals Undermine America's Moral Authority

Pentagon brass, who urged the president not to issue these orders, fear that the president's actions will undermine the system of military justice.


Many Americans are at least vaguely familiar with the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War, which is a story of the evil that ordinary men can do. In 1968, U.S. troops were reeling from surprise attacks by the Viet Cong during the Tet Offensive and they unleashed their fury on the residents of a tiny village during a search-and-destroy mission.

American troops slaughtered hundreds of elderly people, women, and children, with many of them under age 4. As explained, some soldiers "stabbed, clubbed, and carved 'C (for Charlie) Company' into the chests of their victims; and herded them into ditches and blew them to bits with grenades." Many of the company's soldiers reportedly participated in the atrocities, but those who weren't involved didn't stop it. It was shameful.

People often know the name Lt. William Calley, who was the only serviceman convicted of a crime related to those events. He was sentenced to life in prison, but President Richard Nixon ordered his sentence reduced. Calley spent three years under house arrest and then went on with his life and apologized during a speech in 2009.

Sadly, few remember the name, Hugh Thompson, the helicopter pilot who helped stop the massacre. Even fewer realize that that Army covered up the attacks for 20 months, that some war supporters smeared Thompson and others treated Calley as a hero. The Army recognized Thompson's heroism 30 years later, when it awarded him the Soldier's Medal. But, apparently, the disturbing lessons of that event have long been forgotten.

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump pardoned a former Army lieutenant who was convicted of ordering his troops to fire on unarmed civilians. He granted a pardon to an Army major who had been awaiting trial for killing an Afghan man. Trump reversed the demotion of another officer, who had been acquitted of alleged war crimes charges but was convicted of a lesser charge of posing with a dead Taliban fighter.

Not even the worst allegations here came close to My Lai, but there's a reason a number of writers have raised these parallels. Pentagon brass, who urged the president not to issue these orders, fear that the president's actions will undermine the system of military justice. Gen. Martin Dempsey, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, tweeted that it signals "that we don't take the Law of Armed Conflict seriously." He called it an "abdication of moral responsibility." He's right.

"The tragedy of pardoning (Lt. Clint) Lorance isn't that he will be released from prison – I've found room for compassion there," Patrick Swanson, Lorance's commander in Afghanistan told The New York Times. "The tragedy is that people will hail him as a hero." Given some common public sentiments after My Lai, that fear is well-founded. Sure enough, Trump referred in a Tweet to one of the accused men as a "U.S. military hero."

Is it fair to say that it's now official policy that there are no rules of war, that the military's process of enforcing those rules is a farce and that soldiers accused of committing crimes actually are heroes? We certainly should hope not.

There are practical reasons for opposing these pardons. They endanger our troops. If there are no limits in wartime, then our nation's enemies don't have to follow them, either. I understand that the other side rarely plays by Marquess of Queensbury rules, but that doesn't mean that anything goes. By winking at bad behavior, we're likely to get more of it from those in combat, which undermines America's often-touted moral authority.

Our country claims to be different, to be a model for the rest of the world. Maybe not so much anymore. Common Dreams argued that the president's action conforms to "a pattern of refusing accountability for violations of international law and a litany of war crimes over recent decades." I don't buy that leftist narrative, but why give fodder to those who do? The pardons stain the nation's honorable service members by saying that they can't be held responsible for their own actions. If they do atrocious things, well, boys will be boys.

The pardons also suggest that "Trump holds a dangerous, obsolete view of warfare—one that had fallen into disrepute after the horrors of World War II," wrote Cornell law professor Jens David Ohlin, in a Washington Post column. "His actions suggest that he believes in 'total war,' in which warfare is conducted not only by professional soldiers but also by entire societies, including their civilians." Indeed.

I'm pleased that Trump seems less likely than his predecessors to insert the nation into these messy, dangerous international conflicts that endanger our troops and have little bearing on our security. But in giving a pass to those few military members accused of war crimes, the president is reinforcing the kind of dangerous attitudes that led to My Lai.

This column was first published in the Orange County Register.

NEXT: Review: Knives Out

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. "Not even the worst allegations here came close to My Lai, but there's a reason a number of writers have raised these parallels."

    I got your reasons right here. ..

    1. The reason is usually Trump Derangement Syndrome.

      1. Yes! And in Germany, the "White Rose" non-patriotic treason-group ( ) was also into Dear Leader Derangement Syndrome.

        1. A rousing meeting of Libertarians For War Crimes?

          Are you clingers trying to make Libertarians For Authoritarian Immigration Policies, Libertarians For Tariffs, and Libertarians For Statist Womb Management look good?

          Open wider, faux libertarians.

          1. Hi Art,

            I've seen you write a few pro-Big-Government things from time to time that have irked me... But I like your above post! Thanks for at least TRYING to keep the fake libertarians in line! I think that many of them have brainwashed themselves into "my country, right or wrong", sad to say.

            1. Art is a big believer in #LibertariansForGlobalMilitaryPresence. Which, of course, is the correct position. I recall he was genuinely upset when Orange Hitler announced his betrayal of the Kurds.

              1. 3 retards walk into a comment section... no punchline that’s all.

                1. These three probably fuck each other in the ass than suck each other off. In that order.


                2. OBL is trolling the retards.

                  1. You impotent fuckwards call your betters the "elite" because, beneath all of that hollow bluster and alienation, you recognize they are your betters.

                    1. If anyone's an expert in impotence, it's Arthur L. Hicklib.

                    2. Nobody thinks you’re elite you pig fucking moron.

                    3. Instead of trading insults, let's actually look at what six SEALs from Chief Gallagher's platoon accused him of doing. These accusations include:

                      (1) He murdered a wounded prisoner. When told Iraqi soldiers had captured an Islamic State fighter, Gallagher raced to the scene. “No one touch him, he’s mine”, he radioed. He then stabbed the incapacitated prisoner in the neck and told senior platoon members who objected, “Stop worrying about it; they do a lot worse to us.” A week later, he sent a text to a friend in California with a photo of himself, knife in one hand, holding the captive up by the hair with the other. “Good story behind this, got him with my hunting knife,” he wrote. This was the charge torpedoed by a fellow soldier who told investigators Gallagher killed the prisoner, was granted immunity to testify, then surprised prosecutors by claiming “credit” for the death on the stand.

                      (2) He led SEALs under his command beyond the front lines against orders, telling members to turn off their locator beacons so they couldn’t be tracked by their commander, according to four SEALS. When one platoon member was shot during one of these patrols, Gallagher attempted a cover-up of his actions from his superiors.

                      (3) At various points, he appeared to be on drugs. Several SEALs told investigators they saw him taking pills, including the narcotic Tramadol

                      (4) While manning hidden snipers nests in Mosul, Chief Gallagher fired three to four times more often than any other platoon snipers and targeted civilians. One SEAL sniper told investigators he heard a shot from Chief Gallagher’s position, then saw a schoolgirl in a flower-print hijab crumple to the ground. Another sniper reported hearing a shot from Chief Gallagher’s position, then seeing a man carrying a water jug fall, a red blotch spreading on his back. Neither episode was investigated and the fate of those civilians remains unknown. SEALs testified they fired warning shots to keep pedestrians out of range when Gallagher manned the position.

                      So, some questions : Does anyone believe Donald John Trump cares whether these accusations are true or false? Does Trump care whether this is acceptable behavior by a United States soldier? How about all of Trump's defenders commenting here: Think they care about either of those question?

          2. This website is rather unique in my experience in that the commentary section is in such discordance with the viewpoints presented by the website.
            WTF are all of you commenters even doing here reading this stuff?
            May I offer Breitbart, 4chan, or Red State?

            1. A few of the pro-Trump commenters, like John, have been following Reason for years and years. The others, I have no idea why they spend so much time at a website where they despise all the writers.

              1. The writing used to be much more balanced and far more libertarian. But, the same as many progressives who claim to be Libertarians, you agree with this recent progressive turn that Reason has taken. This despite much of their writing seeming to be at odds with the ideals of libertarianism.

                1. It also actually focused on using “Reason” to make arguments. Now there’s more and more appeals to emotion.

                2. Sure, reason just happened to make a progressive turn when Trump got elected. It's not that Trump is obviously unlibertarian and reason always criticizes the president, but you have decided it's all ok because you want them dam mezzicans out. Everyone else has changed but you, yeah that's it.

                  1. I actually voted for Johnson and have no problem with lawful Mexicans. Nor do I have a problem with most illegals, in that I understand why they came here. The articles used to be much more nuanced and scholarly. The comment section reflected that. You are right it is because Trump was elected but you misstate why this has affected them for the reasons you espouge. But you are so convinced of your own mental superiority that any attempt to enter into meaningful debate is futile. You also see the world as either for or against Trump. You create false dichotomies and accuse anyone who disagrees with you as being sycophants for evil.

                    1. The marine corps anthem talks about “the shores of Tripoli” where the first USA marines went ashore in what is now Libya and hiked inland to destroy the base of the Barbary Pirates, an Islamic group who had terrorized the Mediterranean for years. These proud marines killed men, women, and children and wiped out that nest so thoroughly that we were safe from Islam for 150 years!

                      No war crimes were alleged.

                    2. Fair enough. I'll settle down.

                      But to be fair to me, I'm constantly personally attacked on these boards with the most disgusting accusations. You've participated quite a bit yourself.

                    3. My "attacks" on you are based on the complete implausibility fo your claims to be SF but never having served in a line unit and going straight from AIT to Q school. You also claim to have entered the military around the same time I was serving and there was no plausible chance for what you describe having a chance of happening. In 2000 undergoing RIF and SF slots were extremely competitive. I knew several guys who had Ranger and Airborne tabs, who were E-5 and above. Some even had CIBs or CMBs, who couldn't get a slot because of the competitiveness but you claim to have jumped all of these guys straight out of AIT, while on holdover waiting to get jump qualified? Excuse me for questioning that narrative.

                    4. Soldiermedic, one last time: 18x program. I know I had an eventful career, but they were eventful times.

                      Then again, I get called a liar every time I say anything on here. So maybe examine your bias. I'm sure if I was supporting Trump you'd be far less skeptical.

                    5. Oh, and all those guys claiming they couldn't "get a slot" to go to selection are full of shit, or maybe things were very different pre 9/11. They either had something disqualifying in their application or chickened out. SF selection is available to every single soldier who meets the requirements. SF is always understaffed. SF does not turn away qualified soldiers from selection. The commands that those soldiers are leaving sometimes try to slow them down, but ultimately, the SF regiment considers all comers.

                  2. I’ve felt this way since before Trump. I started noticing it when Sheekha got hired. I used to subscribe to the magazine until shortly after that. And I also voted for Gary Johnson. Never voted Republican for President my entire life, and only occasionally for lower offices.

                    But you do you. You’re an asshole either way so I don’t really care what you think.

                    1. The leftward turn started well before Trump's election.

                      The earliest signs were when they started smearing Ron Paul, a good man who is more of a real libertarian in his pinky finger than assholes like Welch and Gillespie are in their entire body. And then it just got worse and worse when they laughably described Obama's election as "Our Libertarian Moment".

                    2. Can you link to any statement where Gillespie or Welch said that Obama's presidency was part of their "libertarian moment"?

                      Ron Paul hurt his own credibility with his poor handling of the who-wrote-those-newsletters kerfuffle.

                    3. Here's a retrospective Gillespie wrote about the "libertarian moment" that he and Welch "trumpeted":


                      What does Gillespie say about Obama?

                      "A new president was elected who promised an even more interventionist economic policy (and was simply playing coy about his equally interventionist foreign policy). Barack Obama was already plumping for the mother of all stimulus packages, and the only question was whether his awful, transformative healthcare entitlement would be more Canadian than British in accent. What have we learned over the past half-decade or so of hope and change? That Obama—who said he'd run the most transparent and clean-smelling White House operation ever—is even worse on civil liberties and constitutional restraints than George W. Bush (who, if memory serves, was worse than Hitler)."

                  3. And there goes Pedo Jeffy, who claims to never race bait, or call anyone racist, calling EVERYONE racist.

                    Eat shit Pedo Jeffy.

                  4. "Sure, reason just happened to make a progressive turn when Trump got elected"
                    So when over half the staff declared allegiance to Barack H. Krishna in 2012, and Her Worshipfullness in 2016, that was what? A libertarian moment? Movement conservatism?

                      AND EVEN CRAZIER ON "ALLEGIANCE"

                      Libertarians reject BOTH of your fucking tribes.
                      That CAN means voting for the lesser of two evils.

                      Libertarians are fiscally CONSERVATIVE and socially LIBERAL.
                      And we also REJECT your SEETHING tribal MINDLESSNESS.

                      Movement conservatism?

                      ****LIBERTARIANS ARE NOT CONSERVATIVE.
                      NOR ARE WE LIBERAL ... which EXPLODES the brains of the OBSOLETE LEFT AND RIGHT ... (who also fail abstract reasoning)

                    2. "YOU ARE A BAT-SHIT CRAZY PSYCHO"

                      Lol, oh wow, Hihn.
                      Wall-of-text all-caps ranting kind of minimizes your credibility on mental health.

                3. I think the perceived turn toward progressivism is just that (a) Reason is always critical of the current administration, but there’s a conservative administration right now; (b) we have an unusually erratically-behaved, incompetent President right now, who happens to be a guy Reason has been reporting on way back to eminent domain abuse decades ago.

                  1. That sure explains the "libertarian case for Obama" that was made here.

                    The prog turn has been a rather long and drawn out process.

                    1. What libertarian case of Obama are you referring to?

                    2. What libertarian case of Obama are you referring to

                      Besides the very first article that pops up, with that very title, when "the libertarian case for Obama" is put in the search bar?

                    3. Ah, I see. It was an article written by a Democrat guest writer back when Obama was first running for President.

                    4. They could hardly contain their glee when Obama was elected. Here you go, this was written by Welch and Gillespie right after the '08 elecion, "The Libertarian Moment":


                      Needless to say, no such vomitous pile of crap was remotely forthcoming after Trump's election.

                      And this place mostly spent Obama's eight years sucking his cock, with the exception of some mild criticism of his immigration policies pre-DACA.

                    5. I followed the whole "libertarian moment" theme that Welch and Gillespie promoted. There was no shilling for Obama. In fact, the article you linked to says only one thing about Obama:

                      "On the stump, Barack Obama preaches a less-interventionist foreign policy and an interventionist domestic agenda; John McCain presents roughly the obverse. Despite each of them claiming to foment change, their adherence to old forms and old labels represents not the first real choice in the new era but the last presidential contest of the 20th century."

                      It might seem like they were saying that it was the libertarian moment because it coincided with Obama being elected, but it was just a coincidence that Welch/Gillespie launched "the libertarian moment" and Obama was elected at the same time.

                      Welch had just written a book about McCain, which was published during the race, and brought up a lot of unpleasant things about him. I guess you could construe that as support for Obama, although Welch was just sticking to his book's subject.

                    6. Looking through Reason's articles that are tagged with "Barack Obama" (there are hundreds):


                      I see articles criticizing Obama for:
                      - Similar immigration policies to Trump
                      - Similar policies in genearl to Trump, and how Democrats don't seem to be aware of this
                      - Running up the national debt
                      - Imprisoning and persecuting whisteblowers
                      - Interventionism, doing nothing to end foreign wars, massive foreign bombings and drone strikes
                      - Expanding the overreach of Presidential powers
                      - His hypocritical attitude toward marijuana laws
                      - Promoting divisiveness
                      - Energy policy, especially policies that increased the price of oil

                      And that's just skimming through the first hundred articles or so from the last year of his Presidency. Reason wrote a lot about Obama, so one needs to be careful of cherry picking examples that "prove" Reason went all progressive and worshiped Obama.

                    7. Reading stuff like the above is when you realize "Mike Laursen" is the sock for one of the writers here.

                    8. Some people think that half the comments these days are from staff sock puppets. I’m beginning to think they might be right.

                    9. And it would be _the worst_ to be a writer for Reason. They are all so awful that we all hang out here and read their writing every day.

                4. "Balance" has nothing to do with being Libertarian you fucking moron! If you're a fuckhead then we're going to call you out for being a fuckhead!

                  1. Balance would be appreciated in their reporting. Their imbalance always seems to be tilted one direction and that doesn't appear to be support for the rule of law or the Constitution but it seems to worship non-elected bureaucrats trying to unseat a lawfully elected president. How is any of that Libertarian?

                    1. Trump deserves about as much balance as Obama received from the right during his presidency, maybe even less in my view and I wasn't an Obama supporter. How is that for some "balance" for a total fuckhead like Trump!

                    2. Gee, what a thoughtful response.

                    3. Libertarians object to many laws. Libertarians seek changes by lawful means. To me the constitution is a very good and useful document but not sacred.

                    4. "Gee, what a thoughtful response."
                      Fair enough. Maybe you perceive that it's unbalanced because your ideology of what balance should be aligns with how much Trump really is a fuckhead. Oh, and I apologize for calling you a moron, that was really unbalanced of me to do that!

                5. You talk a lot, soldiermedic76, for a guy whose screen name should be "O-fer" . . . because America hasn't won a single war while guys like you were settling for a series of vague draws with ragtag irregulars throughout the Earth, squandering enormous taxpayer-provided advantages and resources along the way.

                  Your record is a vivid argument for a draft. Maybe we'd win once every few decades or so with randomly selected personnel.

                  1. “ . . . because America hasn’t won a single war..”

                    Saddam Hussein’s broken neck and two dead son’s beg to differ, you retarded asshole. Prepare to have Trump’s victory and four more years shoved down your throat by your betters hicklib.

              2. Wait, this website has writers? I only come here for the comments.

              3. I like Kurt Loder!

              4. What used to be arguably the greatest libertarian publication in America has been almost completely hijacked by a bunch of Obama-Clinton liberals, and you thought there wouldn’t be any pushback at all? What fantasy world are you living in? Get real bro.

                1. I'm seeing claims here that Reason's decline into progressivism started way back in 2008 or 2009, when Obama showed up on the scene. If that is so, ten years later folks who think Reason now sucks aren't ready to move on with their lives and spend their time somewhere else?

                  1. Yeah, you progtards WISH everyone would just surrender and let themselves be steamrolled by you.

                    Not gonna happen, not on my watch. I will fight to defend America against you scumbags until my very last day.

                    1. Do it somewhere else, loser. Maybe cry outside your front yard you violent bag of shit.

                    2. Oh go suck Block Yomomma’s cock you faggot.

            2. They were more closely aligned before many of them became cult members. It's funny, because it used to really irk me when a democrat would claim that libertarians were just closet racists who made up a philosophical justification for opposing the civil rights act. It turns out, many libertarians really are total fakers.

              1. REAL libertarians like the Canadian faggot cytotoxic support banana republic kakistocracy

                1. Holy moly, whatever happened to Cytotoxic? Or Agile Cyborg for that matter?

                  Heck, outside the Great Exodus, there are quite a few who left the comments section which used to be pretty amazing. Best in the West it was!

                  1. I have browsed through the Glib site. Not cool enough for those guys but some really entertaining stuff there.

                  2. Cytotoxic left either because he could not show his face here anymore after going on for months about how Trump has no chance of winning and anyone that thinks otherwise is a total moron, or else his mom finally took his laptop away so he could focus on his schoolwork.

                    It is said that Agile Cyborg has not been heard from since a mountain of empty Rolling Rock bottles and tape measures in his garage collapsed on top of him. Legend has it he is still trapped there, tripping balls, and travelling various other dimensions.

                    1. Cytotoxic is now Pedo Jeffy aka Chemjeff, a long wth various other socks.

                    2. No, chemjeff could never rise to the greatness of Cytotoxic's glorious commentary.

            3. LUB IT OR LEEB IT!

              I AM VERY INTELLIGENT!

              1. I’m beginning to think you’re not really Britney Spears.

                1. It's one of Tulpa's socks.

            4. Damn. I've been wondering the same thing myself for years. There is no other website cognitive dissonance like this anywhere.

              1. We ain't sheep.

                1. But you are, the reason commentariat has gotten more authoritarian since Obama was elected. You can look at people like Ken, John, et al, and see them come more unhinged in their excuse making. When Obama got elected they screamed impeachment from inauguration, but now TDS LOL. There were a lot of Darrel Issa fans here. Chalk it up to willful ignorance

                  1. When Obama got elected they screamed impeachment from inauguration, but now TDS LOL


                    1. There was never any serious talk of impeachment for Obama. Who actually committed a host of impeccable acts.

                      There were actually articles calling formTrump to be impeached as far back as months before the GOP convention.

                    2. Oh look, ignorance

                    3. ohlookprojection

                  2. Fuck of Hinh.

                  3. Imagine thinking Ken is authoritarian or a Trump superfan.


                    1. Oh look, willful suspense of disbelief. I love how you all change minds.

            5. It would be odd for self described libertarians to be in agreemen with each other. So no surprise here.

            6. I'm here for the laughs.

          3. Arty, STFU. You’re too big a pussy to ever have served. You have no business criticizing your betters. Just continue to hide behind the skirts of Elizabeth Warren, while wearing skirts yourself.

            Carry on Klinger.

            1. Perfect example, that’s some free republic shit right there

              1. Shitlord, Nardz, and R Mac are three of the most hate filled losers on here. Best to just ignore that lot.

                1. Funny how you completely good over the absolute hateful vitriol from the progtard posters here. Quite telling. As for me, I hate communists, I hate socialists. So? These oriole are subversive traitors. They’re evil.

                  I’m not having that shit in my country. If every one of them has to go to protect our constitutional republic, then so be it. Marxist lives mean nothing to me. Why would I ever value anyone who subscribes to the same evil philosophy that murdered over a hundred million people over the last century.

                  As far as you’re concerned, I don’t actually hate you. You’re just annoying, and an idiot. Also, you might notice I’m completely civil to reasonable people who aren’t Marxist shitweasels, or child rape enthusiasts, like Buttplug and Pedo Jeffy.

                  1. ADMITS bigotry ... with glowing pride ... the fascist right ... thinks Sweden is a Stalinesque gulag. (snort_

                    1. No, I just hate traitors like you. As a real libertarian, I hate communists shills, such as yourself.

                      Now kill yourself.

                    2. ADMITS bigotry ... with glowing pride ... the fascist right.

                    3. "No, I just hate traitors like you. As a real libertarian, I hate communists shills, such as yourself. "

                      Remind me, which candidate invited foreign interference in our elections on national TV? The GOP gave up on sovereignty, and you all cheered it away. Calling anyone else a traitor is laughable from you all.

                    4. Eat shit Pedo Jeffy. Go back to the Canadian forums.

                    5. Last of the Shitheads ... called out as a liar (on top of being a proven bigot ... throws ANOTHER hissy fit to suppress free speech ... while claiming to be a libertarian (snort) ... thereby disgracing the movement ... to maybe a dozen crazed Trumptards ... who believe a proud SHITLORD can be libertarian ... while also defending mass violence and and murder, initiated by his fellow neo-nazis, white supremacists and shithead supremacists.

                      Stay tuned for more unprovoked assaults by the right-wing fascist ... wearing a MAGA hat ... and libertarian underwear

                  2. "I’m not having that shit in my country."

                    All-talk, impotent casualties of the culture war are among my favorite right-wingers, faux libertarians, and losers.

                    You will swallow the preferences of your betters for the rest of your inconsequential life. Then you will be replaced. Until then you are welcome to rail and mutter and flail and sputter as much as you wish.

                    1. You're really all in on the pod people thing.
                      Most don't think of Invasion of the Body Snatchers as an inspirational movie, but you do you

                2. Contempt does not equal hate, eunuch

            2. Klinger was one of my favorite characters in the show. He was the most sane one there. All he wanted to do was get out of the insanity of war and go home. It was catch-22

              1. True, my comment was more wordplay on Arty’s cliched sign off than anything else. Plus I wouldn’t be shocked if he dressed up in his mother's clothes.

          4. A pardon is not exculpation.

            And war mongers like you of course like sending people across the globe to kill human beings, as long as it serves your purposes, so spare us your self-righteous indignation.

      2. Boohoo to all the greenhorn candy pants writers. Nothing wrong with grave dancing on the unmitigated @$$wipes who would do us harm.

        Screw all this posturing about being bigger than the other guy. Murder them, bury them in pig guts with their feet facing Mecca.

        Send a f*©king message. Sort out the goatfû©kêrs and give them pause. Conquer them, convert them to Christianity and make them eat bacon to show their acquiescence.

    2. Reason was happy to defend a career rapist and murderer, Rodney Reed with multiple articles, in spite of multiple commenters posting and providing inconvenient facts like those below. Does Reason's Shameful Support for Rapists Undermine America's Moral Authority?


      The rape and murder of Stites was hardly Reed’s first or last foray against women. First was Connie York, a nineteen-year-old who had come home late one evening after swimming with friends. 57.RR.34–35. York was grabbed from behind and told “don’t scream or I’ll hurt you.” 57.RR.35–36. When York did not listen, she was repeatedly struck, dragged to her bedroom, and raped multiple times. 57.RR.37–42. Reed was interviewed, and, while he admitted that he knew York from high school, he denied raping her. 57.RR.123–24. When confronted with a search warrant for biological samples, Reed had an about-face, “Yeah, I had sex with her, she wanted it.” 57.RR.138. The case went to trial four years later, 57.RR.30, 60, and Reed was acquitted, 57.RR.61.

      Next was A.W., a twelve-year-old girl, who was home alone, having fallen asleep on a couch after watching TV. 58.RR.36–42. A.W. awoke when someone began pushing her face into the couch and had blindfolded and gagged her. 58.RR.42–43. She was repeatedly hit in the head, called vulgar names, and orally, vaginally, and anally raped. 58.RR.43–49. The foreign DNA from A.W.’s rape kit was compared to Reed; Reed was not excluded and only one in 5.5 billion people would have the same foreign DNA profile from A.W.’s rape kit. 58.RR.51, 92; 61.RR.26.

      Many more cases at the link. Warning: Disturbing content.

    3. How about we institute trials for the military brass who (having accepted board seats at Raytheon and Boeing) go on the cable news and pose as “military consultants” wearing their full dress regalia and telling us how we need another war with a country that’s half a world away and has never attacked us!?

    4. My experiences in Iraq and Afhgnistan were very, very tame considering the situation, but my time there gave me a better appreciation of those who get shot and IED-d on a reguLas basis. Might wanna give a little consideration to some of these "war criminals" from your position of not getting blowed up.

      1. To be clear my post is to the article's author.

        1. I agree block30. The author even failed to mention what "crimes" for which they were convicted or have any legal analysis or detailed analysis of their guilt. Isn't the presidential pardon a check on overzealous prosecution, and a good thing from a libertarian point of view to right wrongs done by government?

          My thinking on this, is that first we shouldn't be meddling with the US military in foreign countries, and then this wouldn't be a problem.

          As for this article, it's really lacking IMHO from a libertarian point of view. Sure it's good we have rogue soldiers held accountable for needlessly harming others. This article offers no insight on Trump's specific pardons, I'm guessing because there's too much TDS among the Reason staff, and they don't want to defend him or argue what he's doing is good. So, to avoid the conflict among Reason staff, better to not mention the details that support Trump's actions. Even though I see Trump as the most libertarian president in my lifetime.

          Greenhut wrote a column, that should have been published in 1968. He didn't write about Trump's pardons, and the legal merits of the case one way or another. But he slammed Trump anyway as "reinforcing the kind of dangerous attitudes that led to My Lai" without making a case based on the legal merits of the pardon and crime. Anyone could just have easily wrote an article defending the presidential pardon, based on past pardons, and praised Trump for it.

          Come on Reason, you can do better.

      2. That's my thought. I seem to have missed what they were found guilty of doing, so it's difficult for me to weigh the situation. There are certainly things that I wouldn't forgive in the heat of passion. I haven't served, but have been in life and death adverse conditions. There are things people will do that aren't morally justified but are understandable and relatively excusable. The song "Hero of War" by Rise Against touches on it though they take the civilian moral position

      3. We really need to find a way to attract better classes of people to law enforcement and our military.

        1. One thing you didn't see mentioned by the author, is how convictions of soldiers who thought they were defending themselves in dangerous situations, really hurt morale and recruiting.

          While I lean towards Washington's advice to not have a standing army, jailing soldiers for politically incorrect actions (posing for a picture with a dead terrorist - is that so criminal?) isn't good for defending the USA from enemies. But then, meddling in foreign countries with our military isn't either, IMHO. But the people who I'd like prosecuted for that aren't the soldiers.

          1. One of the soldiers Trump pardoned had 9 of his platoon mates testify against him. No one who was at the scene of the incident defended him. His platoon all spoke out about him being a murderer who was looking for blood.

            Trump is encouraging war crimes because his base are unintelligent, lonely, white men who fancy themselves "alpha".

            1. You’ve never served. You are completely full of shit. Seriously Pedo Jeffy, you need to commit suicide for your latest affront. If for no reason than to prevent another child rape.

              1. Get a life, dude.

    5. up to i sAw the pAycheck sAying $7438, i hAve fAith cousin wAs like truley bringing home money pArttime At there lAbtop.. there moms best frend hAd beAn doing this for only About 8 months And A short time Ago cleArd the mortgAge on there mini mAnsion And bourt A brAnd new hondA. this is where i went, go to this site home tAb for more detAil...../

  2. Trump polices are good and he is a good person for his state and that is the best for the US state and i think he is doing right and in favor of his country

  3. I just hope there was a fainting couch nearby for the author of this piece.

    1. Real men just grunt their approval of war crimes.

      1. Hey, the Orange God says they'd defend him of even shooting somebody to death on Fifth Avenue, with witnesses.

        Imagine that. He told the entire world that his cult is among the lowest slime on earth ... and they took it! Proudly spewing even lesser lies.

      2. And what were the war crimes, Jacob?
        Greenhut doesn't elaborate.

  4. Bomb the shit out of them and take their oil, I'll bring back waterboarding and a lot worse, go after the terrorists' families, we should send troops into Mexico, the military will do whatever I tell them to do - any of that ring a bell? Trump's a thin-skinned, vicious little bully who slobbers over other bullies, haven't you noticed?

    1. He’s is the commander in chief
      Of course the military will do anything he says.

      Pretty good ideas we should do some of those

      1. Kill all jihadis, even after they surrender. Behead the Taliban on Youtube!

        1. You guys get all teary and whimpery when America's betters curb-stomp the clingers in the culture war, but you're big talkers when it comes to right-wing delusions about war crimes, torture, and the like.

          Your replacement can't arrive quickly enough.

          1. Hi, gecko!

            1. On the day of your replacement, clinger, I will buy the best bottle of wine I can find that has a gecko (or something similar) on the label and savor my victory over the likes of you in the culture war.

              1. “ I will buy the best bottle of wine...”

                I can see it now, hicklib drinking blue MD 20/20 next to the dumpster behind Planned Parent in his cardboard box. What a brave soldier of the culture wars.

              2. On the day of your defeat, I shall have a goblet fashioned from your bleached skull, from which I will sip the finest red wine available.

        2. I mean, it's almost as if there was a policy put in place so that we didn't have to deal with the politics of prisoners or something.

          1. Please don't ruin the narrative, ravenshrike.
            The Lightbringer could never be guilty of Orange Man's crimes.

        3. Sorry, real Americans don't stoop to the level of our enemies.

          1. Funny, I can go to a US History course on any college campus and hear examples of the exact opposite.

      2. He's the CIC of the US military, not of a brutal dictatorship. The US military is not required to follow all orders given by the CIC, in fact it is required to NOT follow unlawful orders. All those serving in the US military take an oath to only follow lawful orders given by their superiors, including the President.

        You have no idea what this nation is about and is seems pretty clear to me you would love if this nation was a brutal amoral dictatorship.

        1. What was the unlawful order given that someone refused to follow?

          1. Drone executing American citizens without trial?

            That was Trump, right?

            And the military personnel ordered to do so refused... right?

    2. People still believe we went into the ME to steal oil? At most you could say it was an attempt to quell global oil supplies, but never approached stealing for America's gain.

      1. What we've done there is worse than stealing.
        Don't forget, 9/11 was directly caused by our support for Israel.
        When we take sides in wars that do not affect us, the results are tragic

        We took sides in the China-Japan War, shooting down Japanese war planes over China, and suffered Pearl Harbor.

        We took sides in a thousand-year conflict in the Middle East, and suffered 9/11.

        Neither intervention was morally justified, Both blunders drew us into larger wars, costing millions of lives.

        "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

        "Fanaticism consists in redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim."

        -George Santayana

        1. May want to study history better. The American Volunteer Group didn't enter combat until after Pearl Harbor.

          1. Give Dumbfuck Hihnsano a break. His lawyer has to constantly remind him to change his Depends before visiting the office to cry about another person on HnR being mean to him.

            1. I’m on his enemies list three times.

          2. WRONG

            1. The National Archives gives 18 December 1941 as the first combat. I've seen other sources that list other dates in late December.

            2. Not according to any of the historical records from the US, Burma, China or Japan from that time period. So please show me how I was wrong?

              1. Show us your links.

                Then (laughing) Tell us why Japan sent so large a force to Pearl Harbor ... in the opposite direction from their hot war with China .... FOR NO REASON AT ALL 🙂

                You and your fellow FDR defenders are a disgrace..

                1. Hihn, you’re a communist traitor. Kill yourself.

            3. The AVG was formed in April for 1941 but didn't depart for Asia until November of 1941. The spent the next month in Burma training as a unit and didn't enter combat until mid-December 1941, or two weeks after Pearl Harbor.

                1. Hey a hihnfaggot, you just linked to one of your own comments. That isn’t proof, of anything other than you eat your own shit out of your diapers.

                  1. Hey a hihnfaggot, you just linked to one of your own comments. That isn’t proof, of anything

                    (smirk) This is all too complex for you. The proof is at the link ... as I said.
                    So ... YOUR bullshit is demolished there, too, stalker!!!

                    1. Your ranting should only prove you eat your own shit.

              1. BTW, The American Volunteer Group is ... the wrong group. (Renamed)

        2. Oh hey look, Hihn the senile piece of subhuman welfare leeching shit is also a rabid anti-Semite. Who saw that one coming?

          Go buy an Israeli Desert Eagle .50 AE and shoot yourself in the mouth with it Hihn. No one will miss you.

          1. Thanks for proving my point!

        3. Oh btw tell us more about how assassinating Gaddafi and starting a civil war in Syria was justified and how we "abandoned the kurds" you worthless racist piece of obsolete old shit.

          1. Cowardly diversion.




                LEFT - RIGHT = ZERO
                MEANS they have EQUAL VALUE. ASK ANY 7TH GRADER!! 🙂

                Right -wing goobers HATE to be outed as no better than lefties.
                So they make fucking stupid comments about equations ... repeatedly. Because Bellowing Blowhards.

                This has exploded in Unicorn's puss many times. So why does it keep repeating it? A Bellowing Blowhard with an authoritarian mentality ... EXACTLY like the authoritarian left!! 🙂 🙂 🙂 .

                1. MEANS they have EQUAL VALUE. ASK ANY 7TH GRADER!!

                  And Left / Right means they have OPPOSITE DIRECTION. Ask any 2nd grader who's learned the number line.

                  Thus, Left - Right = Left - (-Left) = 2X Left.

                  1. Proven a jackass ... Unicorn goes FULL RETARD!!

                    Left - Right = Zero
                    MEANS they have EQUAL VALUE. ASK ANY 7TH GRADER!!

                    And Left / Right means they have OPPOSITE DIRECTION.

                    (sneer) NOT IN POLITICS, FUCKSTICK.
                    DOES NOT EVEN KNOW THE CONTEXT!!!

                    Ask any 2nd grader who’s learned the number line.

                    ALSO DOES NOT KNOW IT'S ..... ALGEBRA!!!

                    7 - 7 = 0
                    1567 - 1567 = 0
                    1.56 - 1.56 =0
                    2,889,504 - 2,889,504
                    ANY VALUE - ANY VALUE = ZERO

                    So .... HOW stupid are right-wingthugs?

                    Thus, Left – Right = Left – (-Left) = 2X Left.

                    FUCKS UP ANOTHER EQUATION!!

                    When the Authoritarian Right fucks up one of their assaults, they BELLOW an even CRAZIER defense!!!!!

                    Also true for the Authoritarian left ... because ... wait for it ...
                    LEFT - RIGHT = ZERO!!!

                    HOW stupid?
                    As I said, Algebra is taught in 7th grade.

                    1. And the number line is taught in 2nd.
                      Additive association? Also 2nd.
                      Positive/negative numbers? 3rd or 4th.


                      BUT THE TOPICS IS ALGEBRA

                      And your "equation" is still an accurate display of your "IQ"

                      Thus, Left – Right = Left – (-Left) = 2X Left.

                      When these psychos fuck up ... the spend the rest of their lives on revenge ... looking even crazier than the original fuckup ... but the ONLY way they can feel "manly"

                      In other words, just like their nazi, racist Orange God.



                      ... A .... NUMBER .... LINE ... IS .... NEVER ... EXPRESSED ... AS AN EQUATION ... BY (a) ANYONE WITH AN IQ HIGHER THAN A DEAD GERBIL ... OR (b) THE ALT-RIGHT (same IQ)

                      ADULTS derive pride and pleasure by stating facts, with a source, and by learning from other adults

                      CYBER-STALKERS derive pride and pleasure by ... spewing "zingers" ... while giggling ... and compete to see who can be the nastiest dumbass on the page.

                      Short version ... anyone who confuses an equation with a number line is ALMOST too retarded to breath ... thus, a PROUD stalking, redneck goober.

              2. LIAR! Prove it! DVD - CD = Jolly Rancher sour apple + popcorn lung. Fake libertarian cockgobbler!

                1. FAIL AGAIN, JESSE 🙂

                2. I can prove I'm libertarian! Hihn, show him your enemies list.

                  1. I can prove I’m libertarian!

                    COWARDLY EVASION!!!!.

                    And I've ALREADY proven you a total dumbfuck stalker .,.. even crazier than a mere bully!!


                    Get a life, LOOSERTARIAN.

                    Will he now now sink ever-lower into the sewer ... and STILL evade the topic???

                    1. Libertarians all hate you. You’re banned from the LP for all the damage you did. You’re going to die alone. No one could possibly ever love you.


                      Where does keeping and maintaining an enemies list lie?

                    3. Will he now now sink ever-lower into the sewer … and STILL evade the topic???

                      ASSHOLES ALWAYS PREDICTABLE!

                      A LIST OF ASSAULT BULLIES CAN BE POSTED BY ANY VICTIM -- right, left, libertarian or independent

                      HOW MANY SUCH LISTS ARE YOU ON?

    3. Yet, for all his bluster, the Trump administration has killed, abducted, and tortured far fewer people than the Obama or Bush administrations.

      Obama and Clinton were so dangerous because they pretended to be peaceful and law abiding while abusing their powers to undermine the Constitution and kill people.

      How about we go by what people do instead of what they say?

      1. Wrong, you are being fooled by Trump's big mouth.

        He has not only INCREASED droning, he has loosened restrictions resulting in more civilian deaths. Obama ended 'enhanced interrogation,' ie torture and tried very hard to close GITMO while Trump has voiced support for even harsher methods of torture and he of course just loves GITMO.

        Indeed, how about we go with what people do instead of what they say.

        1. Ah, typical strategy by Obama apologists: cherry pick your data and examples, and then fall back onto irrelevant observations about what Obama “tried” and Trump “said”. How stupid do you think people are?

        2. Enhanced interrogation is not torture. Don’t be a pussy. Sweating terrorists for intel is a good thing.

      2. "Yet, for all his bluster, the Trump administration has killed, abducted, and tortured far fewer people than the Obama or Bush administrations."

        True enough, the Trump administration isn't very good at actually DOING anything. He can talk all day, but actually putting forth any effort... nah, maybe tomorrow.

        1. And comparing 3-year results with 8-year results is kinda .... dumb.

        2. True enough, the Trump administration isn’t very good at actually DOING anything. He can talk all day, but actually putting forth any effort… nah, maybe tomorrow.

          And actual libertarians are happy about that. Of course, it bothers statists, socialists, and fascists to no end.

        3. Stupid Pollock.

  5. Anybody down with imprisoning the people actually responsible for throwing these warriors into a quagmire war, and while we're at it, the jerk-offs who write the Rules of Engagement and purposely stretch the conflict to 20x its necessary length to enrich their War Machine friends? Just askin'.

    1. I am, especially for the last reason.

    2. What does the military know about military justice anyway?! Trump is smarter than all the generals combined! harumph harumph harumph

      1. He’s smarter than all the weasels Obama appointed. Obama purged a lot of the real general officers and promoted political weasels who would implement his social experiments. Like all this tranny bullshit.

        That’s where these phony prosecutions came from in the first place. The author here is just an ant military pearl clutching pussy ignorantly condemning men infinitely better than him. And in this case ‘him’ is a term I use loosely.

        1. "That’s where these phony prosecutions came from in the first place"

          From the SEALs that reported Gallagher?

          1. They had it in for him because he was riding them hard. Do some background research. The brass had it in for Gallagher. And funny how it turned out they all lied, isn’t it? But please, keep touting how they resorted him after they all perjured themselves.

            1. You really do swallow whole whatever fox news throws at you, eh?

              1. You never served. You’re completely full of shit. Right Pedo Jeffy?

        2. "He’s smarter than all the weasels Obama appointed."

          He isn't even smarter than an actual weasel.

          1. You’re just another progtard with TDS. This is clear by your weak unsupported shrill commentary.

        3. Indeed. These Obama officers are the assholes whose real goal is to turn our military into nothing more than a division of the global blue helmet police force.

      2. You’re part of the “Libertarians in support of the Military-Industrial Complex” club? Part of the “I Love to Grovel before Generals” kink club?

        1. Pardoning war crimes supports the military industrial complex. This is looking like shifting the moral middle ground around war crimes to make forever wars less morally questionable. "It's ok when we do it to really bad guys."

          1. The military industrial complex doesn’t consist of the hapless young men and women sent to fight these stupid wars, and pardoning them isn’t the same as saying that what they did was OK.

            1. "pardoning them isn’t the same as saying that what they did was OK."

              Except that that's exactly what it is.

              1. No, that’s not what a pardon is. Get yourself a dictionary and look it up.

          2. Pardoning innocent men who were railroaded is justice. But I don’t expect a child rape enthusiast like Libor, aka Pedo Jeffy to understand.

            1. You have no argument except libel.

              You are awfully obsessed with kid-fucking. I hope someone is keeping an eye on you.

              1. I’m obsessed with destroying child rape enthusiasts like you Pedo Jeffy.

    3. People in the military have free will, right. They could either quit or— if that’s not possible—refuse to deploy, correct? I’m with you... i’m For assigning most of the blame for these atrocities to the people who sent them there (and that would be Johnson, Nixon, and GWB), but you can’t exactly absolve a person who signs up to join the military in 1969 or 2003 or 2004. Either they were idiots or wanted to kill peasants in the 3rd world. Neither quality is admirable.

      1. Yes because it was all about killing peasants. What a stupid fucking assessment.

      2. I joined in 2004. I thought the Iraq war would be over before I got out of basic. I wanted to go to Afghanistan. I was a kid who wanted to serve his country. I dropped out of college to join on an infantry contract. I thought I would take a little 3 year break from normal life and get some Hemingway-like experiences. This was my generation's war; it was revenge for 9/11. I wasn't going to miss my chance.

        The war in Afghanistan was well justified, morally and legally, in my eyes. It still is (legally), it just isn't practical or a good use of our resources, which has been apparent since 2010 at the latest.

        1. You enlisted in 2004 but got out in 2011, but served 11 years? Something doesn't quite add up. And you claimed to be in on the 18X program (which started after 9/11 but can't find the exact year, which is something I never heard of so I admit this makes parts of your claims more likely) the 18X is an enlistment bonus but you stated you enlisted as an 11X. You under stand why people question your story?

          1. Out of active duty in 2011, left the NG in 2015. 7 years active, 4 years guard.
            18x is an enlistment program/contract separate from the bonus (which I didn't get since I joined with 11x contract).

          2. This is getting super tedious.

            1. You’re a liar. We all know you are Pedo Jeffy, aka Cytotoxic, who is a Canadian.

              You just sink lower all the time. Now stooping to stolen honor.

              1. It's pretty hilarious how weak your arguments are. I am who I say I am. Just another thing you are wrong about.

        2. Thanks for telling us in no uncertain terms that you are dumb as a rock and that your moral and political judgments are worthless. And you obviously haven’t learned any better since then.

          1. Oh fuck off. Are you going to make an argument that the war in Afghanistan was illegal, or are you just here to name call?

            1. Whether the war in Afghanistan was illegal or not is not relevant to what it says about you that you signed up voluntarily to fight for the US military.

              1. Oh? You were all for no response to 9/11? I doubt it. You seem like you are hyperventilating a little there. You ok?

                Hindsight is 20/20.

    4. YES!!! Me!!!

      Excellent points, even a Libertarian could/should agree with.

    1. In recent articles, I've seen the prosecution of the case summarized in one line. The writer will use some phrase like "botched prosecution". Not detailed, like the article you linked to, but then the article you linked to was written while that was the new news about what was going on in the case.

        1. All I said is that recents articles don’t go into much detail but DO allude to prosecutorial mishandling.

          1. You're not going to get the transparency of civilian courts as you would in military tribunals. The fact that the judge removes a prosecutor for misconduct says something. Even though there was a conviction, there are still lingering doubts about the case. Hence a pardon but like all R administrations before him, Trump = Hitler.

            1. The fact that Gallagher's teammates actually filed a report says something. You guys are taking Trump's side over the SEALs.

              A prosecutor getting relieved does not make the accused innocent.

              1. No, it doesn’t. You really need to review the background of the case. Gallagher was railroaded by men who simply disliked him.

                1. I know that's the defense. But I know too much. I'm not buying it.

                  1. Pedo Jeffy, you know nothing. Another guy did it. Now go back to moderating your NAMBLA meetings.

                    1. I'm not Jeff, but you might be retarded.

            2. Exaggerating all criticism of Trump as being "Trump = Hitler" is a way of being dismissive of those criticisms without considering them.

              Just to be accurate, Gallagher wasn't pardoned. He was convicted of one of the seven counts against him. Trump intervened to prevent him from being demoted in rank and possibly stripped of his Navy SEAL Trident pin.

              1. SEALs are cowboys already. They are universally panned within the special operations community. They need a dose of discipline very badly if they are going to continue to be a part of soc. They have already had all their missions taken away and relieved of their partner forces in Afghanistan for civ cas incidents and green/blue violence. They are incredibly frustrating to work with, because of exactly the kind of shit Eddy was accused of. They don't try to win the war or think long term, they act like a bunch of frat boys with guns.

                1. What team were you on in Afghanistan?

                  1. Army Special Forces. I'm not giving the ODA # up. Eddy was attached to my team for a few weeks, along with a couple other SEALs. They were war tourists, looking for some action because they got their mission taken away.

                    1. God, when I asked you what branch and your MOS last month you refused to answer now you are SF? You also didn't know what a barracks lawyer was or a Blue Falcon (not accurately) and confused the terms blue falcon and ate up/soup sandwich.
                      Just prove me wrong, what rank do you have to be to even apply for SF school? What MOS series is SF?

                    2. I was an e3 when I went to the Q. I was 11x on entry to the army, then 11b, then got the chance to volunteer for the 18x program while I was in airborne hold. The traditional path required the soldier to be an e4p or e5, at least back in 2004.

                      I never refused to give up an MOS and I never didn't know what any of those things are, I just think they're pretty dorky terms to use.

                    3. No, you said a blue falcon was a bad soldier, when it is really a buddy fucker. The correct term for a bad soldier is soup sandwich or all ate up. How did you get into Q school as a 3? Are you triple tabbed? And you got to volunteer before being jump qualified?

                    4. look up the 18x program or ask someone about it. It was to take people off the street and put them straight into SF selection. The army got a bunch of 5 year enlistment 11b's out of it, and SF got a bunch of fresh blood when it needed it.

                      I went outside of the normal 18x path, though. I joined with an 11x airborne contract. While waiting for airborne school to start, an SF recruiter came around and informed us (all straight from infantry school at Benning) that any 11b with a 110 GT and 270 PT score could have their contract changed to 18x. I was the only one who did it, because you lost your post-basic leave if you went with the program. Everyone else wanted to go home for 10 days so badly they decided to do a career in the infantry instead of SF. Schmucks!

                    5. I know what a blue falcon and barracks lawyer is. You jumped on me when I was explaining the terms to someone I thought had never served. Buddy fucker can be interpreted 2 ways at least.

                      You will also have to forgive my ignorance of big gay army stuff, because I was never in the regular army after basic and airborne.

                    6. Your ODA number is not secret or classified in any way. I was on 192,1330,1323,7214 over my career. I read down post you went to the PI, I’m assuming what group you were in. Your team number will let me know who you are though as I can vet 18x/team and narrow it down to about 3 people, add your ETS date an I can confirm you.

                      BLUF if you want to represent a community, which you do not speak for, atleast have the balls to speak like a man and prove you are who you say you are.

                      To Soldiermedic, 18X is a thing, at the time he said, they were 11x initially until they were selected. If they failed they reclassed to 11b.

                      He (DOL) is generally full of shit, but yes, he is correct about 18X. He may be really dumb about the Army many 18x are. 18X were/is a bad concept that comes on and off in decade cycles. They actually had 18x in the 70’s. Called something different. 18X as it stands today became part of the rot eating SF.

                    7. Great, Havok. I'm still not looking to dox myself. I use a vpn religiously.

                      Internet comments are forever, and if I wanted to make a permanent record of my political beliefs for the benefit of the Chinese, Russians, or our own future tyrannical government, I would have just used my full name.

                      No reason to tell you my team numbers or my name. Ask people who were in 2nd battalion for the '09-10 SOTF 12 rotation if SEALs were getting attached to teams with Commando missions. That should be enough for you to vet me without putting my name all over.

                      And now you can eat crow over your stolen valor comments about me. Thanks.

                    8. And your comments about the 18x program show me exactly the type of SF soldier you are. I saw a lot of them when I showed up. Let me guess, you drink too much, are usually injured or otherwise have an excuse to not do team PT, really enjoy the trips to Thailand, say "brother" a lot, perhaps you ride a motorcycle.

                      And I notice a lot of regular ass team numbers in you career. All that time in SF, two groups, but no time for dive or halo school? Lol.

                    9. 7214 is a halo team clown; now I know you are not an SF guy. You were a support kid playing SF. You are inconsistent just like your views. You tell me that you won’t give a team number, but you say if I ask about SOTF 12 I can find out. Guess what, 2nd battalion is not the CIF, as far as your regular team numbers goes. And no I was not the fat injured guy...I was the guy that crushed runs in 10:12. You are right though the closest I got to SFUWO was DMT. I have plenty of schools and tons of awards.

                      But I digress, you are stolen valor because you are not a green beret. You are pretending to be an 18X. All your vpn/dox/China bullshit doesn’t pass the smell test.

                      You are a public liar, talking about your 1st hand knowledge of the SEAL teams and your affiliation with SF.

                      I will permanently Mark you as stolen valor, as you are a red hat Not a green beret.

                    10. Believe what you want. What does the cif have to do with anything? Cif never went to afg, at least in my time. I'm talking about your lack of dive bubble.

                      And I was just at 1st group the other week for the guys getting their names on the wall. I doubt any red hats are invited to those after they're out.

                2. LOL What the fuck could you possibly know about the SpecOps community?

                  That's a rhetorical question by the way. Your input clearly demonstrates that you don't know jack or shit about them.

                  1. Get fucked. You are calling me a liar only because I upset your fragile and fake worldview.

                    1. I am calling you a liar, because your unsupported, absolutist statements about the SEALs indicate without question that you ARE a liar.

                    2. Mmmk. You have information to the contrary? And no, Chris Kyle's book of straight lies and lone survivor movies don't count.


                    3. Wow, those links sure do cover the entirety of the SEALs!

                      It's amazing how two articles allow you to denigrate everyone from those entering BUD/s all the way up to those who are about to retire.

                      Face it: You're an asshole, using the examples of a few to categorically insult the whole (which also makes you a moron).

                    4. They do show a pattern. I'm showing you that SEALs have a discipline problem. A problem that those of us in sof have known about and griped for a long time. Ask Havok what the opinion of SEALs is within special forces. Everyone will believe havok because he's another trump supporter. Lol @ the logic and reason among you Trumpers.

                    5. You are right. SEALs are generally not real liked. They conspired to kill an SF guy to cover up theft; then killed Melgar.

                      DOL- the problem I have with your argument is this;

                      You say Trump got in the way of NAVSPECWAR giving out punishment.

                      You also say the SEALs are nearly wholly “Cowboys” with no discipline.

                      After 3 years in a Joint SF and SEAL command I can tell you, they protect their own to a fault.

                      I can also tell you they are petty and vindictive, particularly the E8/9 and 05/06 level. Similar to SF, but they take 1st place by a mile.

                      I think you are getting heat because you are sending a conflicting message. You are saying they are so incompetent, but need to be left to police themselves.

                      I read the article by Eddies brother. He provided links to his accusations. Many of the links were official government documents.

                      I know it is 1 side, but couple that with the governments side and the fact the government t witness admitted to killing the kid with morphine.

                      I know medics that were ordered to “dose them on morphine until they stop breathing.” Usually with unsurvivable head wounds with no evac available, but again context matters.

                      Trump has every right to commute eddies sentence. He was also correct to sack the SECNAV. I hope he cleans out all the Obama era GO’s in NAVSPECWAR and puts some people that will crack down on discipline.

                      Military discipline starts at the top and these leaders are not leading by example. They have let disciple decay under them, it wasn’t trump that broke the SEALs. They did that all by themselves.

                      Now trump stirs the pot and everyone loses their shit.

                    6. Just to be clear on what happened, Trump didn't fire Secretary of the Navy, Spencer. Defense Secretary Esper asked Spencer to resign, it seems with some reluctance on Esper's part, because of Spencer's handling of Gallagher's case.

                  2. Mike,

                    SECNAV openly disobeyed a lawful order by Trump. I know SECDEF asked for the resignation, but I can assure you the big boss was asking for it. I get what you are saying, but a SECNAV is appointee by the POTUS. Usually a SECDEF won’t fire one unless POTUS is asking or atleast agrees.

                    As soon as SECNAV states he would only follow an “official” order thru the proper channels I knew he was done for.

                    1. I don't think we really disagree, except on semantics. It seems that the Secretary of Defense asked for the Secretary of the Navy's resignation without waiting for Trump to say anything first, but who knows what may have happened that we didn't hear about.

              2. Gallagher was convicted of taking a picture of himself next to a dead body. That’s it. But they tried to railroad him for murder.

                The military should be purged of all the people Obama advanced during his term. Same as the Civil Service.

                1. So you want the military to be purely political.

                  That's worked well in so many other countries.

                  If there was ever any doubt regarding your intellectual pitfalls, they've been eradicated.

                  1. Obama was the one trying to pervert it politically. Trump is fixing that.

                    Stop twisting things around.

  6. Until Orange Hitler stole the 2016 election, the United States was a force for good in the world. Even when we arguably made a mistake, such as the Iraq War, we had noble intentions. Like overthrowing tyrants and spreading democracy.

    Now that our foreign policy is effectively under Russian control, America's reputation is in ruins. Just like our economy. That's why it's so important to embrace the early 2000s neocons and reestablish a bipartisan, patriotic foreign policy consensus.


    1. You’re not by yourself around any sharp objects are you?

    2. How's Charles Koch's net assets doing this fine day after Thanksgiving?

      1. Same as they have been throughout the high-tariff / low-immigration #DrumpfRecession — unable to exceed $62 billion. Whereas they'd be worth at least $70 billion in a Hillary Clinton economy.

    3. Is your entire purpose around here designed to excuse authoritarianism and dismiss the thuggery of Americans in uniform? Get bent, fascist.

      1. Says the guy who supports statism whenever given the chance and worships unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.

      2. So, you’re with the terrorists then? Ok, that’s typical of a progtard. You’re the same kind of traitor who eulogized that dead ISIS commander as an ‘austere cleric’.

        You shitweasels always root against our troops. You should probably be hung as a traitor.

  7. For an article about "America's Moral Authority" this one sure is short on facts. At least any facts not fifty years old.

    1. I mean, in 1968 were people actually writing articles about what happened during WW I?

      1. WW2 maybe, see Dresden.

        1. "Slaughterhouse Five", written in 1969.

          1. So, historical fiction.

            1. I suppose so, although the Dresden parts of "Slaughterhouse Five" aren't all that fictional: it's pretty much Vonnegut's straight retelling of his experience being a prisoner of war in Dresden during the fire bombings.

              1. You could actually be pedantic, if you were not such a moron.

                Yes, historical fiction is based upon historical events.

                I'm still waiting for someone to give me a late 60's work (of fact of fiction) that sought to relate contemporary events to Passchendaele.

      2. Of course

      3. A quick search finds this WW1 book, first published in 1968:

        A Soldier on the Southern Front: The Classic Italian Memoir of World War 1

        1. The New York Times had four articles written about World War I in 1968. Two of them were retrospective pieces written explicitly because it was the 50th anniversary.

          1. Did any of those articles attempt to relate that fifty year old history to current events? Was there any discussion of war crimes during WWI?

    2. The article is total bullshit by an anti military shitweasel.

      1. To be clear, when a "shitlord" calls someone a "shitweasel" is that an insult or a compliment?

        1. ^^THIS
          He just runs around babbling and insulting people.
          No actual substance.

          1. Hihn, you just accurately defined every comment you’ve ever made. Now kill yourself.

  8. For all I know, Trump is wrong about this, but I've heard wolf cried so many times now, . . .

    Whatever Trump does next week, there's no need to worry that it will be insufficiently condemned by nearly everyone in the media.

    I saw people going after him for pardoning a turkey?

    1. "I saw people going after him for pardoning a turkey?"

      I didn't see that, but I wouldn't disbelieve it.

      1. Newsweek botched the story of what Trump did on Thanksgiving, and, Trump, rightfully made the most of it:

        1. HAHAHAHA

          Trump is pissed .. PISSED ... that Newsweek DID NOT KNOW he was going to make a secret, surprise trip to Afghanistan. OMG

          Newsweek botched the story of what Trump did on Thanksgiving, and, Trump, rightfully made the most of it:

          Then I could make fun of you, rightfully. But I'll merely correct your very obvious error..


          The White House concealed the trip from his public schedule for security reasons.

        2. The reporter ended up taking the fall. Seems to me the editor was more at fault.

      2. But then Trump went and made a bizarre statement where he apparently believes there is a war on Thanksgiving:

        1. It is statements like this that just show how ignorant you actually are. There was a concerted effort this year in academia to villainize Thanksgiving.

            1. LOL that article is from last year.
              Campus radicals have been complaining about Thanksgiving for years. And yet no "war on Thanksgiving" has emerged.
              This is a clear case of Trump saying something stupid and you trying to rush to his defense in spite of himself.

              1. You're not familiar with the constant attacks on black friday, lefty "shame your GOP cousins at the Thanksgiving table" objectives, and the mounting campaign the reimagine the day as day of mourning? Eco freaks urge people to tofuturkey to save the earth.

                Parts of the media makes up a story about Trump spending the day playing gold, but oh no, something something Trump.

                1. What does criticism of Black Friday, in whatever form, have to do with trying to rename Thanksgiving?

          1. The story I linked to goes into all of that.

            1. Yeah, the same way Pravda used to “go into” capitalism.

          2. There was a concerted effort this year in academia to villainize Thanksgiving.

            (snort) TWO universities ... on a right-wing hysteria web site ... going ape-shit over nothing new, or significant.

            JesseAz shows the typical victims of such hysteria mongering.
            As did Chicken Little.

            1. Now tell us about Trump is a Russian asset Hihn, you paranoid, psychotic, deluded worthless piece of subhuman shit.

              1. Nope. All I said was JesseAz is full of shit ...which can be proven in two minutes at his link. (yawn)

                JesseAz shows the typical victims of such hysteria mongering.
                As did Chicken Little.

                And now Sevo's Britney sock. 🙂

                1. I’m just glad I’m a REAL libertarian. Not like that pussy Michael Hihn, who single handedly ruined the LP.

                  Guess people like me are going to have to clean up his mess.

                  1. Claims libertarians SUPPORT unprovoked aggression!
                    Is PROUD to be a Shitlord.
                    How fucking stupid is he??

                    who single handedly ruined the LP.

                    The raging hatred of a psychopathic stalker. Pity his soul.

                    1. I pity LOTS soul. Still searching for yours.

                    2. But ... but ... the Unicorn assassin was PROVEN a total dumbass .... here



                    3. And AGAIN here ....

                      Yet, it CONTINUES with the unprovoked assaults of the Authoritarian Right ... just as bad as the Berkeley snowflakes ... BECAUSE:
                      Left - Right = Zero!!
                      Two sides of the same authoritarian coin ... now less than 40% of Americans combined ... and still shrinking ... as they scream intro the wind, shaking their fists at the sky

                      Posted in self-defense of repeated unprovoked assaults ... by a PROVEN bully/loser. The militant self-righteous.

                    4. Hey Hihncunt, have I made your enemies list a fourth time yet?

                      You stupid little bitch. They probably pass you around the nursing home like a pack of cigarettes.

            2. Hihn, it’s clear you’re a Russian asset trying to destroy civil political discourse in the US. Go back to your handlers and tell them you have failed.

        2. Trump has learned how easy it is to manipulate the Christian Taliban.

          1. LMAO. Hey Hihn remember when you spent 3 years telling us that Mueller was going to indict Trump? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

            Imagine being a useless subhuman piece of shit dying on Medicare in a government old age facility because your family despises you.


            1. LMAO. Hey Hihn remember when you spent 3 years telling us that Mueller was going to indict Trump? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

              (yawn) A sitting President cannot be indicted, as the Mueller report stated, three times. And "3 years" is how a crazed hyena fucks up, bigly

              (Michael Cohen's tape of Trump setting the Stormy Daniels bribe will see him arrested on his way out of the White House)

              1. On what charges? Non-disclosure agreements are legal. Try again.

                1. What is crime is Michael Cohen in prison for? He did that at the behest of Trump, also known as individual-1 in the indictment. Trump is on the hook for the exact same crime as Cohen. If Trump is not re-elected or pardoned, he will likely face those charges.

                  1. Think positively. He could die in office, and save us the expense of a trial.

                2. Ummm. Depends what the NDA is used for.

                  AND ... If no problem, why did he lie about it so strenuously?

                  Try again.

                  You lose again ... EVERY TIME

    2. NYT: "Tens of thousands of doctors and researchers lose jobs as Trump finds a cure for cancer."

      1. CNN: Trump cures for cancer, but what are the side effects?

        1. If Trump cures cancer, progtards will take up for the rights of malignant tumors, just like Hihn.

          1. Tumors are not just a "clump of cells", like Trump thinks!

            1. ‘Clump of cells’ will be a ‘dog whistle’ for racists.

      2. On Twitter today

        “Doctors wrong for years. I am smarter.

        Only I can CURE CANCER”

        D. J. Trump

        1. Yes, the AMA is sure doing a bang up job

      3. Fox: hundreds of millions of young Americans, mostly yet unborn ... facing crushing debt and tax obligations ... created by President Trump ... who inherited the longest recovery EVER for an incoming President (from Obama), but has ALREADY added as much 8-year debt as Obama added AFTER eight years (CBO 2024 forecast) .... .... but .... .... that's HOW Trump is Making America Grate Again .... just ask his mindless puppets!!!

        1. Hihn, we know where you live. You might want to stop before we petition to have you involuntarily confined for the rest of you short miserable life. Your posts here, plus that website of yours are proof you’re a danger to yourself and others.


            we know where you live.



            THAT IS WHY TRUMP HAS SUCH RAGING HATRED FOR OBAMA .... PLUS ... (OMFG) ... SEE ... Obama's lengthy and hilarious put down of Trump's psychopathic Birther drooling ..... IN PUBLIC ... TO A LARGE AUDIENCE!

            Obama pretended to be wrapping up his remarks with no mention of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

            "Well let me conclude tonight on a more serious note. I want to thank the Washington press corps,” Obama said. "The free press is central to our democracy and …

            nah ... I’m just kidding! You know I’m gonna talk about Trump! Come on!," he said.
            You GOTTA hear this! .... to Trump's face ... as Trump sits there, in totally helpless rage!)

            LONG BEFORE Obama also kicked Trump's ass on fiscal responsibility!!!

            How many Republican Presidents are even worse on debt than that COMMUNIST from KENYA, Barack Obama?
            1) George W Bush
            2) Donald J Trump
            Left - Right = ZeroThe future is libertarian ... America's voiceless majority ... IF AND WHEN we REJECT the anti-gummint gooberism that DESTROYED the GOP. (I'm looking a you,

    3. He is wrong about this. It is highly detrimental to discipline and morale when someone gets a worse penalty for DUI than murder.

      All you dickheads are going to cry stolen valor, blah blah blah. But I knew Eddy. SEALs had all their missions in Afghanistan taken away at one point for shenanigans like the ones Eddy was accused of. It wasn't the first time. Let's just say I wasn't surprised when Eddy's name popped up in the news.

      1. I'll stipulate that everything you wrote is correct. If the Navy had prosecuted him in a fair, objective, and correct manner, DJT never would have been involved. But, they didn't, so here we are.

        1. Gallagher got off easy with the one charge. He was facing murder and it seems like he did do the crime. Don't forget that it wasn't some nansy pansy staff officer who reported him, it was other SEALs.

          And the 3 other cases Trump has intervened in? Were they all mishandled too? Or does Trump have a penchant for cruelty and red meat for his coal rolling, gun toting, fake christian followers?

          1. What team were you on? As an Alleged SF guy, I don’t think you were let inside “eddie’s” team house.

            1. Eddie was let inside my team house, briefly. Those SEALs didn't have a pot to piss in, since they pissed away their mission.

              1. Accepting your general characterizations of SEALs (I got out just before Iraq, and my only experience was with them as bodyguards while I carried the radiological material), Gallagher was acquitted on every charge a civilian could have been prosecuted for, and was only convicted on taking naughty pictures that brought disrepute on the Navy. That conviction could have come just as easily from a dick pic, and knowing how the Admirals Gestapo works I wouldn’t be too surprised if he were railroaded (which is why you always accept a summary court martial if it’s available).

                The article also conflates all of these - Gallagher was acquired of all of the heinous charges, but he gets conflated with others (whose details I’m not familiar with).

                That’s an inappropriate conflation of categories, so you have to doubt every other assertion in the article because the only parts I have knowledge of are mischaracterized.

                1. At worse the one crime he was convicted of should have resulted in a letter of reprimand.

                2. He was acquitted, and that's fine. I find it likely that he did the things he was accused of, but that was the result of the trial, and I'm not losing sleep over it. But he was also convicted, and the Navy and the SEALs should be left alone to maintain discipline. God knows the SEALs need it.

                  1. The Navy alone should be in charge of his punishment? What is the chain of command again? And doesn't the President have the power to commute and or pardon military servicemembers convicted under the UCMJ?

                    1. No one is questioning the president's authority. We are questioning his good judgement.

          2. Yes, they were all mishandled. And everything you said about Gallagher is total bullshit. You’re either completely ignorant, or in the tank to crucify him.

            So really, STFU.

            1. I'm the only one here who knows and has worked with Eddy.

              1. Really? So not only SF but worked with this SEAL? I am pretty certain the closest you ever got to SF was playing Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six in your basement in your underwear.

                1. Or maybe 14 and 14. De Oppresor Libel, please explain what the phrase 14 and 14 means.

                  1. Spent 9 years on SF teams and never heard that term. I've been out of active duty since 2011 and completely out of government service since 2015, though.

                    1. 14 and 14 is a common reference to a company grade article 15, it stands for 14 days loss pay and 14 days restrictive duty. It was common when I got out on 2005. And I bet most of the veterans here knew what it meant.

                    2. Never was in big army, never faced ucmj. I think you don't understand how insulated SF is from a lot of the big army silliness. And generally if guys are getting a penalty like that, they are out of the unit and tab removed. It isn't like the 82nd barracks where every other NCO is thrice divorced alcoholic who is facing disciplinary hearings.

                2. Eddy and a few others were attached to my team for a few weeks. I also worked with SEALs on a single mission in Mosul, and rubbed shoulders a few times in the Philippines. It happens.

          3. You left out the part where the medic, having been given immunity for his testimony, confessed to offing the terrorist by compressing the breathing tube. Gallagher was innocent of murder.

            Barnstormer has this right. Better for everyone if POTUS Trump has not been involved at all. The only reason he got involved was the tremendously terrible way the navy went about this.

            ODL...I personally did not have a problem with the photo. Why? War is war. We say there are rules, but there really aren't. There are many things that happen on a battlefield that confusing, wrong, and better left behind on the battlefield. The photo is something I look at in that light. The Navy should have exercised better command judgment on handling it.

            1. I think they got him for the photo because the prosecution botched the rest of it so badly, that that was all there was left. But it is against ucmj, so why shouldn't he face consequences for it. Eddy's teammates and command both want him gone, so why should Trump intervene?

              1. ODL....Did you miss the main point?

                There are many things that happen on a battlefield that confusing, wrong, and better left behind on the battlefield. The photo is something I look at in that light.

                1. That's fine. I agree. But it wasn't left on the battlefield, and now that it is brought to the attention of everyone, there needs to be consequences. The whole military system is based on the idea that one man can order another man to his death and he will follow that order. Discipline is required in all things, or it all goes to shit.

                  1. There was a consequence. Bad command decisions by Admiral Spencer resulted in his forced resignation.

                    If we agree that there are things that happen on a battlefield are better left there (like the photo), perhaps we agree here as well that bad command decisions (e.g. Spencer) drove this debacle.

                    ODL...I would have much preferred that POTUS Trump never had to get involved in the first place. This trial never should have occurred to begin with. But it did. When a miscarriage of justice did occur entirely due to spectacularly stupid command decisions, the POTUS acted. I don't really like it because the military should be doing this themselves so the POTUS can focus on the truly important stuff.

        2. If the Navy had prosecuted him in a fair, objective, and correct manner, DJT never would have been involved.

          Like Trump is that involved in what the military does

          1. Well he's the commander in chief and has the authority to issue pardons. He could also pardon the Silk Road founder, who was sentenced to life for no good reason.

            Who sets foreign policy objectives? It's not ambassadors and generals. They can replaced at the president's whim.

            1. Give Pedo Jeffy a break. He’s a Canadian who doesn’t know shit about America. He’s also very stupid.

    4. They even went nuts when he honored the military dog that cornered Al-Baghdaddy, helping to send him to his 57 virgins.

      The media has been hopelessly biased a pretty long time, but now they really have gone completely fucking batshit insane.

  9. Can’t you get a job with the New York Times or the Washington Post or CNN or MSNBC or the Atlantic, you fucking retard?

    1. Life on the disaffected, inconsequential, whining, Trump-fondling, clinger fringe sounds dismal. I guess life is rough when replacement by your betters is all you can really look forward to.

      1. Hi, gecko!

      2. Arty, when you pukes force a civil war, you’re going to go slow and painful. Screaming like the little pussy you are.

      3. Oh, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC, Reason, and NYT are being replaced by their betters. Those old media have to go for the bottom of the barrel when it comes to hiring these days.

      4. Personally, I think Reverend Arthur I Kuckland is much better than you.

    2. Mikey! Where have you been, peach pie?

  10. Wow Reason is pro-prosecutorial conduct?
    Just soo much libertarianism happening here these days LOL

    Trump should pardon Flynn today

    1. Misconduct that is

      1. Have you not been reading Billy's impeachment articles? Or noticed Reason completely ignoring the IC misconduct on Flynn and against Page? All the while propping up Amash who also doesnt give 2 shits.

        1. REASON has become interesting in the same way a freakish mutation might be interesting.

    2. Yep. Reason now even supports the manufacturing of bullshit dossiers and other fake evidence to facilitate illegal domestic political espionage if it's done against targets they don't like.

      "I'm a liberal."
      -Matt "Welchie Boy" Welch.

    3. Reason is more than willing to accept all sorts of government abuses if they weaken the fascist grip of the Orange Man on America.

      Desperate times, desperate measures.

    4. A shitty prosecutor means the accused is innocent? What about the 3 or 4 other cases Trump has personally intervened in? Our military must be so incompetent compared to Trump the draft dodger.

      1. A shitty prosecutor means the accused is innocent?

        Yes cytotoxic. That's how the legal system works here in America. Innocence is presumed unless guilt is proved beyond a reasonable doubt in accordance with the rules of process. Prosecutorial misconduct renders the accused innocent because it demonstrates that the prosecutor could not meet his burden.

        1. "pardoning them isn’t the same as saying that what they did was OK."

          Nonsense. Proving the prosecutor is lazy doesn't prove they couldn't have won by expending the proper effort.

      2. A prosecutor not abiding by the rules means the accused has been robbed of their right to a fair trial.

        I remember when the Left claimed that they'd prefer 100 guilty go free than one innocent be punished, but that clearly is not the case now.

        1. He was still convicted. He got off easy. Trump still had to pervert justice, though. The SEALs are trying to kick him out of the unit, but Trump is claiming he knows better than SEAL command what's good for them. This is ridiculous.

          1. Wait didn't you just say that SEALs were nothing but frat boys with guns who were in serious need of discipline? Yet now their judgement as to who is qualified to be a SEAL is unquestionable?

            Look, we get it: you hate Trump. But you're starting to sound ridiculous here.

            1. SEALs and Trump both suck. In this case, the SEALs are trying to clean house, and Trump is preventing them.

          2. Considering the SEAL command tried to block John Chapman's MoH because it made them look bad, these assholes getting overridden by Trump is the least they deserve.

            1. Way to connect to very disparate points of info. Not cohesive, but you did it.

              1. Translation: "I can't defend the fact that SEAL command's credibility is shit."

                1. Of course I can't and I won't.

                  1. But just because they have shit judgement in one place doesn’t mean they screwed up Gallagher’s prosecution too.

                    They may have botched it and prosecuted him only because if the venality of the Admiralty, but he could still be dirty as hell and have no place on the battlefield.

                    Of course a track record of screwing things up should hurt a presumption of competence, but when has any libertarian assumed the government was competent?

          3. Being the Commander in Chief, It is exactly the case. You clearly don’t know anything about a chain of command. You are a swamp creature; you believe unelected swamp creatures should be the alpha and omega.

            1. I believe in law of land warfare and military discipline.

              1. Part of that law allows the president to pardon people, for any reason.

                1. "...but should he?" is the question we are debating. You don't want the president to pardon every convict ever, so clearly there are limits to what is a good pardon and what isn't. Pardoning every case the military brings against soldiers for battlefield crimes is not beneficial for our country or our military.

                  1. You made an argument on lawfulness. Now you’re shifting the goalposts to utility. You can’t make up your mind, can you?

                    See, it’s simple: Trump is a politician and he most likely did this because he thought it was going to be beneficial for his reelection chances. And that, per se, is pretty good justification that he “should”, because apparently a lot of people believe that it’s the right thing to do, or at least that there is nothing wrong with it.

                2. "Part of that law allows the president to pardon people, for any reason."

                  Doesn't grant him immunity from being criticized for it, though.

                  1. Oh no, Leftists are criticizing Trump for (x)!
                    We better take it super seriously

                    1. You're here defending him.

          4. Libor, stop. You’re just spouting bullahit now. Quit making this shit up. You’re just a lying progtard.

            Go back to avid, or whatever traitor rag you jerk yourself off to to get this garbage.

            1. I'm not lying. As usual, Trump cultists can't stand the sound of truth.

          5. "He was still convicted."

            Prosecutors spying on defense counsel were able to garner a conviction. Go them.

            "Trump still had to pervert justice, though."

            What Presidential pardons DO NOT "pervert" justice, in your eyes?

            "The SEALs are trying to kick him out of the unit, but Trump is claiming he knows better than SEAL command what’s good for them. This is ridiculous."

            Who is in CHARGE of the SEALs? Maybe you think we should revisit the concept of civilian control of the military but I certainly do not.

            1. Well I'm glad you trust the guy who plays a billionaire on TV to do what's best for special operations forces.

              1. I'm glad you think the military being in charge of itself is preferable. That has never led to issues before.

                1. Nice strawman.

                  1. That's the EXACT point I was making.

                    We have civilian control of the military. Period. Either you want that or you want the military to make its own rules. You have come down firmly on the latter.

              2. He's the commander in chief. Presidents set foreign policy.

                Voters aren't going to choose someone like Ike or General Grant for every election.

          6. Convicted of a crime that would usually only result in 14 and 14 at the most and cleared of all other charges. But I doubt you even know what 14 and 14cmeans.

            1. You're right I don't. But I've never been in the big army and I've never been UCMJ'ed so I wouldn't. I'm guessing it means 2 weeks no pay and 2 weeks duty or something like that.

              1. Never been in the big Army? There is no way you can be SF without serving in the regular Army first.

                1. Big army means non-sof. We also call it the regular army, even though that means active duty to everyone else.

              2. SF selection is based upon the idea that only professional soldiers can apply. As such no initial entry soldier can apply, or anyone who hasn't served several years. You can apply as an E-4(p) but the preference is for E-5 and above. Preference is also given to soldiers with combat experience, Ranger experience and or service with the XVIIIth Airborne Corp. Medics also have some preference for 18D but it isn't a requirement.

                1. look up 18x program. I was never in a "regular" unit. I've only served in sof units.

                  1. I did look up the 18x program. It appears to be an enlistment guarantee buy you claimed to have enlisted as an 11x which seems to be contrary to what o can find on the 18x program and stated you switched to 18x after AIT but before jump school.

                    1. Right. It would be a far easier lie to just say I went in as an 18x. But since I'm telling you what actually fucking happened to me, and not some story, it's a little more complicated than what you found on google.

                      I'm done explaining myself. You don't want me to be telling the truth, so you aren't going to be convinced that I'm telling the truth. It is obvious that you are not open minded. You have made your mind up about Trump and so you have made your mind up about anyone who isn't on the Trump kool-aid.

          7. Yes he should. Gallagher and his family have already been severely punished by the process employed to railroad him. So Trump is putting an end to it.

            And FFS. The guy is retiring today. The only difference is that he retires with his SEAL pin intact. So cut your bullshit line about the SEALs deciding who gets to stay. He isn’t anyway.

      3. No, a shitty prosecutor means that the accused is found “not guilty”.

        But Trump didn’t “personally intervene” in any cases, he pardoned people, a legitimate power of the presidency. A pardon doesn’t declare the convicted man innocent, it simply removes the penalty.

        So, as usual, you are lying through your teeth.

        1. The truth is treason in an empire of lies.

          1. Wow...that was the lamest attempt at a deep comment I've seen since your last comment.

            1. But I wow'ed you.

          2. Thanks for endorsing my post and admitting that you are part of an “empire of lies”.

  11. "Is it fair to say that it's now official policy that there are no rules of war, that the military's process of enforcing those rules is a farce..."
    No, the military's process is neutered.
    Jus in bello is still a thing, and the vast majority of servicemembers are beholden to its moral stake, while commanders work to adhere to the internationally recognized principles (e.g. Geneva Conventions).
    I didn't vote for him so much as I voted against her, and while I applaud Trump's efforts to avoid one conflict and get out of another - these pardons cut commanders off at the knees.

    1. Well maybe prosecutors shouldn’t spy on the defense attorneys?

      Just sayin

      1. So, two wrongs make Gallagher and Trump right?

        1. This is the first time you've ever claimed a prosecutor was wrong. And you only did so to condemn something Trump did.

          1. Have we ever discussed a prosecution before?

            1. Haven't you heard?
              You're my sock.
              And De Oppresso's sock too.
              And probably Tony's sock too.
              So yeah JesseAZ has had "lots of conversations" with you already. LOL

              1. Oh, I know. It's hard to engage in any serious debate with someone who attributes all kinds of statements to me that were made by other people.

                1. Oh, the irony is hilarious

                  1. I have never, ever accused someone of being a sock puppet. Accusing other people of being sock puppets is one of the most boring, time-wasting, I-live-in-my-Mom's-basement behaviors exhibited by commenters here. It is supposedly an insult or something, but it is completely ineffective. Who the hell cares if someone is a sock puppet -- it's what they are saying that matters.

                    The most bizarre is the comment above where I am accused of being a sock puppet for a Reason writer. So, every single commenter here hangs out at the Reason website and comments on the posts, yet several of them are spending their life's precious hours reading a website written by writers they don't like. That's pathetic.

                    1. LOL
                      Nice tantrum.
                      Notice the word "irony"
                      Notice that "hypocrisy" goes unmentioned.

                      "engage in any serious debate with"
                      ^this is just your typical dishonesty, as you clearly don't want to engage in serious debate - instead, you directly state that the entire reason you post here is to whine about other people not hating Trump enough

                      " someone who attributes all kinds of statements to me that were made by other people."
                      ^and this is ironic when replying to chemjeff, whose entire schtick is the above. I don't call him psychotic for nothing.

                      Get a life, "Laursen"
                      Your emotional instability and intellectual insecurity isn't going to be resolved until you take an honest look in the mirror, and I kinda doubt you've got it in you

        2. "So, two wrongs make Gallagher and Trump right?"

          Prosecutors spying on defense counsel doesn't effectively kill any hope of a fair trial for the defendant?

          1. Apparently, it destroyed most of the case, leaving only one of seven counts.

            1. A selfie with a corpse. That’s it.

              1. ...which is still a crime. More serious than crossing the border illegally, and you all are fine with detaining people indefinitely, children included, for that infraction.

                1. I don't feel it is more serious. At all. One is crass. One is criminal.

                2. Is taking a selfie with corpse (if that's really all he did) really a more serious crime than crossing the border illegally, especially if the parents are fake or paid human traffickers to carry them and minors to the country?

                  Libertarians were always in favor of pardons, you can find several articles here urging Trump to do just that. I would be fine with Trump pardoning Lori Laughlin, The silk road founder, or even Snowden. They all broke the law but each have some case for leniency.

        3. If the prosecutors are trying to railroad the guy, then yes.

        4. Yes, that’s how the US system of justice works: if there is substantial prosecutorial misconduct, the accused gets off free regardless of the merits of the case.

    2. "...these pardons cut commanders off at the knees."

      Aw, poor widdle generals and admirals...
      That whine is Thunderbird, sometime last week.

      1. And those commanders are the ones still loyal to Obama. They need to go anyway.

    3. "...– these pardons cut commanders off at the knees."

      Sometimes--most sincerely--the commander has it coming.

      1. What the fuck does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Doesn't change a thing; the lion's share of uniformed servicemembers fight IAW international law. When they don't, the UCMJ either exists for a reason. When POTUS steps in and pardons folks that stood before the long green table and were found guilty of war crimes, he neuters and subverts the process.
        Are there shitty commanders out there? With 25 years of military experience, I can give you a qualified yes. But, that's not what this is about.

        1. "When POTUS steps in and pardons folks that stood before the long green table and were found guilty of war crimes, he neuters and subverts the process."

          So ONLY civilian courts should be subject to pardons?

          1. That's a fair point that deserves a response. POTUS has the power to pardon following court martial proceedings, yes. I do not, on the whole, object to pardons regarding offenses committed by servicemembers against the UCMJ. However, I get heartburn from pardoning egregious offenders (i.e. Lorance) in violation of internationally recognized norms in the right-carriage of war.

            1. I would not call his actions egregious. It appears he felt that the speeding motorcycle was a threat and some of his platoon didn't agree while others agreed that it did pose a possible threat. Considering that the Taliban often uses motorcycles in assaults against troops and they (Laurence's platoon) was patrolling a known hostile village and he (Laurence) had the ultimate call as the CO of the platoon he may have acted rashly but they don't call it the fog of war for nothing.

          2. "So ONLY civilian courts should be subject to pardons?"

            That's a strawman.

            The actual argument presented is that more judgment should be applied to pardon applications before they are issued. This is not particularly complicated, so the assumption is that you're trying to switch to something else because you're afraid you'd lose the argument if it stayed on the actual topic.

            1. "That’s a strawman."

              I'll quote him:

              "When POTUS steps in and pardons folks that stood before the long green table and were found guilty of war crimes, he neuters and subverts the process."

              Describe it otherwise, please.

  12. Related:
    "Fired Navy secretary blasts Trump: 'Very little understanding' of how military works"
    "WASHINGTON — Richard Spencer, who was fired as Navy secretary for his handling of a SEAL war crimes case championed by President Trump, wrote that the commander in chief “has very little understanding” of how the American military works...."

    Seems the fired bureaucrat has very little understanding of how the US government works.
    Hint: The POTUS does not serve at the pleasure of the military; it's the other way around.
    You'll do better if you consider yourself the people who show up when the PA system says "Need cleanup on aisle #6".
    Oh, and your whining about how Trump will "...undermine the system of justice..."? Well, you're supposed to lead those under you.
    Shaddup and siddown.

    1. When I served, time and time again, they trained and taught us NOT to obey orders from our superiors, which would violate ethical norms of warfare. Don't shoot or otherwise kill non-combatants deliberately for no good reason other than your killing-jollies, don't "do" genocide, and don't kill or torture POWs. Now I guess they have had to add, do NOT pose with dead victims of war, as if you've just bagged a 12-point buck, and you want to brag on Facebook.

      Doing these things does NOT lead to long-term peace and prosperity! And now, sad to say, Dear-Leader POTUS is heavily leaning his big fat, dumb thumb on the scales on the side of the violators... No good will come of this!

      1. "When I served, time and time again, they trained and taught us NOT to obey orders from our superiors, which would violate ethical norms of warfare."

        But that's not surprising. Fucking ignoramus scumbags like you would be more than happy for the CNO to be appointed 'temporary POTUS' so long as it was Trump that was pushed from office in a coup.
        Fuck off and die; I'm tired of your TDS.

        1. I'm tired of your pro-Trump TDS, AND your general lack of at least TRYING to use facts and logic!

          Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!

          So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…

          Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:

          Hi Fantastically Talented Author:

          Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.

          At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.

          Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to .

          Thank You! -Reason Staff

          1. This is your brilliant day.

            Remember, Reason shields and defends slime like Sevo, proclaiming themselves champions of free speech .... but hs banned and purged FIVE for defending libertarian values.

            Will THIS be purged?
            (I took a screenshot)

            1. Will THIS be purged?
              (I took a screenshot)

              Fuck off and die Hihn.

            2. "...but hs banned and purged FIVE for defending libertarian values..."

              I'm not sure why you've been banned, but that ain't it.
              I can only hope it happens once more, permanently, and we can all ignore your early death.

              1. I want to petition the state of Idaho to throw him in the nuthouse. I can only imagine his raving as men in white coats come and force him into a straitjacket and muzzle him. Then shoot him up with enough Thorazine to pacify a hippo.


              Hihn literally admits that he operates at least 5 sockpuppet accounts and thinks this actually vindicates his imbecility.

              Shoot yourself in the brain stem with a 10 gauge shotgun Hihn. You are a useless piece of subhuman shit.

            4. Will THIS be purged?
              (I took a screenshot)

              You should have something to fill up all that free time from your family avoiding you during the holidays and your lawyer serving as a proxy relative.

          2. SQRLSY One
            November.29.2019 at 10:37 am
            "I’m tired of your pro-Trump TDS, AND your general lack of at least TRYING to use facts and logic! ..."

            Called on your bullshit and all you got is "TRUMP!!!" for "facts".
            Fuck off and die.

            1. Here's your facts... You ever read them?

              We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!

              “The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”
              He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me reality schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
              All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!

              Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!

              1. More TRUMP!, TRUMP!, TRUMP!
                Sad, but we can hope it is shortly fatal.

                1. Why would you hope the President will die soon?

              2. Facts, Sevo-style... Or, facts that Sevo MIGHT be able to read and understand...

                Trumpty Dumpty, He’s quite off-the-wall,
                Trumpty Dumpty won’t stay in His toilet stall
                He just goes ahead and takes His shits,
                Totally regardless of where-ever He sits
                Whenever He simply, no way, can sleep,
                He Twits us His thoughts, they’re all SOOO deep!
                He simply must, He MUST, Twit us His bird,
                No matter the words, however absurd!
                He sits and snorts His coke with a spoon,
                Then He brazenly shoots us His moon!
                They say He’ll be impeached by June,
                Man, oh man, June cannot come too soon!
                So He sits and jiggles His balls,
                Then He Twitters upon the walls
                “Some come here to sit and think,
                Some come here to shit and stink
                But I come here to scratch my balls,
                And read the writings on the walls
                Here I sit, My cheeks a-flexin’
                Giving birth to another Texan!
                Here I sit, on the pooper,
                Giving birth to another state trooper!
                He who writes these lines of wit,
                Wraps His Trump in little balls,
                He who reads these lines of wit,
                Eats those loser’s balls of shit!”


                  WHAT A KNEE SLAPPER!

                  1. Real Britney Spears makes tolerably good music.

                    Fake Britney Spears dumps mindless troll-turds all over the place, for lack of ability to write anything meaningful.

                  2. "MIKEY HIHN LADIES AND GENTLEMEN!"

                    S is more than capable of out-Hihning Hihn without being a sock.
                    SS is just a fucking lunatic.

                2. Facts, asshole-style:
                  Yes, we know.

                  1. HOW brainwashed are Trump's puppets-on-a-string??WE WERE WARNED ... Trump is a FRAUD and a MOOCH ... BY FOX
                    NEWS! ... NOT THE MSM (smirk)

                    "I have never gone bankrupt, by the way," Trump said. "I have never."Moderator Chris Wallace questioned whether Trump could be trusted to handle the American economy in light of the fact Trump-related businesses have filed for corporate bankruptcy four times since 1991.

                    "In 2011, you told Forbes Magazine this: 'I've used the laws of the country to my advantage.' 
                    But at the same time, financial experts involved in those bankruptcies say that lenders to your companies lost billions of dollars,"Wallace said to Trump.
                    "Question sir: With that record, why should we trust you to run the nation's business?"

                    Trump, who stressed that he had never personally gone bankrupt, suggested he merely used legal procedures to his advantage.((EVASION - BULLSHIT))
                    "I have used the laws of this country — just like the greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, for myself, for my employees, for my family, et cetera," Trump said.

                    ;Wallace dismissed this as Trump's "line." (((aka CRAZED BULLSHIT!)))

                    Wallace, like his father, is a genius at getting people to reveal damaging truths, but NEVER nails the conclusion. Like all great journalists, he extracts truth for your eyes and ears, and YOUR judgment
                    (Here's what Wallace COULD have said: "Anyone can use the law to their advantage ... but that can NEVER include screwing the people who trust your most
                    your own investors, suppliers and non-family employees.")
                    Trump uses the law to EVADE yes. … but using the law to HIS advantage Trump ESCAPES the damage his failures had inflicted on so many others. That's called gaming the system.

                    He's never gone bankrupt personally, only the businesses he managed! (LOL)

                    1. Trump Organization is an LLC ... a massive loophole for a favored few ... they enjoy the limited liability of a corporation (not personally responsible for debts and damages), but loopholed out of the corporate income tax.
                    2. Every penny of Trump Organization's revenues and profits are reported as personal income on his personal return. AND he campaigned on a 15% personal tax rate for himself, on top of his corporate loophole!

                    Trump campaigned to be a billionaire paying a marginal (top) income tax rate of 15%. What’s your top tax rate, suckers?

                    Yes, he's quite good as using the law to his best advantage. But when he says "all the greatest people do it every day" ...
                    HE is ALL all the greatest people himself, as he keeps telling us.No ACTUAL "great person" SCREWS those who trust them most, REPEATEDLY

        2. Open wider, Sevo.

          Or continue to rant impotently against the better people who have rendered you and other clingers inconsequential in America's culture war.

          Will you show enough respect to wear a suit to your replacement?

          1. Stuff it, asshole bigot. Your better is cleaning out septic tanks as we speak.

          2. Sevo wasn't welcome at Thanksgiving this year because of his behavior. You'll have to excuse him while he throws his tantrum.

            1. "Sevo wasn’t welcome at Thanksgiving this year because of his behavior. You’ll have to excuse him while he throws his tantrum."

              Was that your sorry ass they asked to leave next door?
              Aw, poor widdle TDS victim is all butt-hurt...

              1. You're too retarded to even be original.

                "Sad!" as your precious skin-puppet likes to say.

                In some ways, I take pity upon you. You're too stupid to even realize how stupid you are, despite everyone around you trying to point it out.

                1. Jason you’re the dumbest cunt of all. You’re with a Pedo Jeffy sock, or a cut rate knock off of Pedo Jeffy. And probably a child rape enthusiast, just like him.

                  1. Aw, li'l triggered Shitlord thinks he's a big tough guy!

                    LOL. I can just imagine you standing there with poop running down the side of your pampers, waving your lollipop around vehemently, bawling and screaming for mommy in the middle of the adoption agency, wondering why nobody will take you home.

          3. Or continue to rant impotently against the better people who have rendered you and other clingers inconsequential in America’s culture war.

            Kinda funny how you've lost control of the presidency, congress, and the court system at precisely the same time you assure us that your genocidal fantasies are actually coming to fruition. Why it's almost like you project all of your sad, futile, impotent rage onto others like a weak minded piece of shit.

      2. But neither Trump, nor the commanders in the field, issued any of those type of orders. He merely pardoned three members of the military whom he felt were treated unfairly by the UCMJ and JAG. It doesn't give a green light for the rest of the troops to massacre civilians.

        (Incidentally, for an example of when US troops were given a green light to massacre civilians, google "General Curtis LeMay").

        Like Greenhut, your argument is undercut by the hysterical assertion that somehow these perfectly legal and constitutional acts will destroy discipline in the military and result in an orgy of illegal killings.

        Lincoln's wholesale pardon of hundreds of deserters and malcontents didn't cause us to lose the Civil War. The Republic will survive just fine.

        1. "It doesn’t give a green light for the rest of the troops to massacre civilians."

          How many look-asides and USMJ bypasses would it take, before you considered it a "green light"?

          Also, does this help us "win hearts and minds" among foreign populations that are straddling the fence, wondering whether USA military interventions are going to help them and their friends and families?

          1. SQRLSY One
            November.29.2019 at 11:14 am

            "How many look-asides and USMJ bypasses would it take, before you considered it a “green light”?..."

            Oh, look! Concern troll is getting pants in wad.
            Enough so that those without a fatal case of TDS would notice; you do NOT qualify, shitstain.

            1. There are boat-loads of officers in the military, who have bent over backwards to publically NOT be political, and now Trump is politicizing the entire military! If Trump had his way, all armed personnel would swear personal loyalty to HIM, instead of the USA Constitution! Do ALL of these officers suffer from anti-Trump TDS?

              “You Can Wreck a Military This Way”
              Donald Trump is dangerously undermining the military’s chain of command.

              1. "There are boat-loads of officers in the military, who have bent over backwards to publically NOT be political, and now Trump is politicizing the entire military!"

                More TDS!
                My goodness! Please do NOT seek help; we can hope it is fatal in your case.
                Hint for those who are not afflicted:
                Pardoning several soldiers, even if they do NOT deserve it, does not "politicize" the military.
                Suggesting that the military take precedence over the POTUS certainly does, but don't let facts get in the way of your raging imbecility.

                  Trump Faces Epic Blowback Over His Tweet About John McCain’s Death

                  Trump (the draft dodger) villainizing a war hero has nothing to do with politicizing the military? How about Trump trying to witness-intimidate an active-duty military officer (Vindman) while Vindman was testifying to Congress? How about Trump diverting military funds (contrary to allocations made by Congress, per the USA Constitution) to wall-building instead? Is Trump supposed to be a Constitutional Commander in Chief, being a good example for us all? Or is He supposed to be a Military Trumptator, doing as He please, often on whims?

                  Oh, I forgot, the facts don't matter to you, only name-calling does...

                  1. Sorry Squirrelly, you just make it so hard to not call you the drooling, raving moron that you are.

          2. Trump pardoning a guy who pieces of shit like you effectively sentenced to death for taking a distasteful picture is a green light for...something or other.

            Shoot yourself in the brain stem with a 10 gauge shotgun slug Hihn. You are a worthless piece of subhuman shit. I promise no one will take a picture with your corpse - nobody fucking cares about you.

            1. Keep yapping, clinger. It makes it easier for decent people to shove progress down your whining, impotent throat.

          3. Nixon's commutation of Calley's sentence didn't result in an epidemic of My Lai-type atrocities because the troops figured they could get away with murder. These pardons are not going to change anything.

            And I got news for you: our schizophrenic foreign policy in the Middle East over the past 40 years will do far more to discourage foreign populations than Trump's pardons of three obscure low-level war criminals (one of whom was never convicted of illegally killing anyone, BTW).

            1. Calley was at least sentenced... Same is NOT true of current offenders!

          4. Winning hearts and minds does not work. People stole a principle of Special Forces and perverted it.

            Even special forces doesn’t worship “hearts and minds”.

            Most people have no idea what it really means.

            Additionally, this has made COIN the greatest failure in military history. COIN has never worked in the history of man. Once we decided that we wanted to play the IO game “hearts and minds” as a PRIMARY “strategy” we haven’t won a war since.

            1. Additionally, this has made COIN the greatest failure in military history. COIN has never worked in the history of man.

              It worked just fine during the Indian Wars. In fact, that's a textbook example of how to conduct COIN. The catch, of course, is that you have to colonize the lands you take over, disarm the inhabitants, and shunt the surviving remnants on to parcels of land far from the population centers you've taken over or established.

              Trying to conduct COIN and maintain the population status quo is, indeed, a recipe for failure.

            2. "Winning hearts and minds does not work."

              Treating conquered peoples nicely works better (especially in the long run) than otherwise.

              Example: Ukraine welcomed Nazi soldiers as liberators from that Supreme Asshole, Stalin. Welcomed them with open arms! Nazis treated many of them like shit, like cows to be milked, and worse. Ukrainians soon learned "meet the new boss, same as the old boss". Being an asshole did NOT work for Hitler! It won't work for us and for Trump, either, if we follow Trump too far into the darkness...

            3. What's you level of expertise? Hearts and minds was the name of the game, at least it was 10 years ago.

              Of course, the guys on teams have never been that into it. We all preferred direct action missions, naturally. But that doesn't mean you can start killing civilians and POW's because you got your feelings hurt.

              If we aren't trying to avoid civilian casualties, then why are we even putting guys in harm's way when we could just drop MOAB's and be done with it?

              Putting guys with rifles in harm's way is to use a lighter touch and to avoid civilian casualties. It is not for SEAL fratboys to glory hunt. Support the mission, or get out of the way.

        2. So the deterrence effect of justice isn't real? Are you serious?

          Trump is a pussy. He dodged the draft by lying about an injury. He never served. He has never done anything for this country.

          Why why why the fuck would you trust him in matters of the military over dozens of people who have devoted their lives to service?

          1. Because they've devoted their lives to the services and therefore have no objectivity?

            1. Really taking the "total layman shooting from the hip is better than nerdy experts" thing to whole new levels, aren't we? oh well, nothing is too low to stoop to in defense of Trump.

            2. Medical doctors, for having devoted their lives to trying to heal people, are thus incapable of objectively considering medical matters?

              1. Their devotion to the medical profession, not just their devotion to their patients, should always be considered when evaluating their judgement.

                1. It is more a question of expert opinion than objectivity. Say that there is a question about which is the best surgical procedure for treatment of thoracic aortic dissection. Dr. Hue maintains that procedure A which he has been doing for years is best. Dr Lue says that procedure B which he recently developed is better. They each have data to support their position.

                  No layman would be qualified to make a judgment because they would not have the technical knowledge and background. The only way to get an opinion is by review by panel of experts in the field who would then reach a consensus which is what actually often happens.

                  None of that can be said to be truly objective. It is the best expert opinion you can get.

                  In this case Trump, although acting legally in his capacity has made a misjudgment by overriding military justice because he lacks the background and knowledge to understand the reasons behind the decisions of the military court and how order and discipline are maintained.

                  1. "Rule by experts and everything should be made easier" (see Caplan article for the latter)

                    That's an odd brand of libertarianism

                    1. If we can be civil.

                      I am not talking about rule at all. I said what Trump has done in these cases is legal. I think it is poor judgement in my subjective perspective.

                      My point was more about objectivity in matters requiring expertise. Objectivity cannot be obtained simply because the observer is not an expert in the subject. In fact it makes it more difficult.

                      In my example of the cardiothoracic surgeons or my encounter this week with the plumber installing a new dishwasher. The uninformed observer is more subjective because I have little idea what you are talking about. I tell the plumber to go ahead with the job because I have hired him before and I trust him. That is purely a subjective judgement.

                    2. But, again, the AMA is an argument against your point.
                      What you're saying is generally accurate, but not when applied to union-type bodies whose primary interest is self promotion rather than their supposed field of expertise

                    3. The AMA has little role in medicine. You are misinformed about them. Vast majority of docs have no idea what they are up to and don’t care. Only about 10% of docs are members and most of those because you can get good deals on stuff like life insurance.

                      It is just a political lobby organization and one without all that much clout. They do publish a decent journal but in the community are not considered an important scientific organization nor do they represent them.

                    4. Lol
                      Sure, go with that.
                      Good to know your ethics

          2. "Why...would you trust him in matters of the military over dozens of people who have devoted their lives to service?"

            Well, for starters, having served in the military myself I know as well as anyone that just because someone has stars on their shoulder boards and a big fruit salad on their chest it doesn't automstically mean they are trustworthy or competent.

            The second reason is because according to the Constitution, Trump is CinC. In our system of government civilians run the military, not the generals; always have, always will.

            Trump did nothing illegal or even improper here. Unless you're willing to let the generals and admirals disobey orders they don't like, then you'll just have to learn to live with this and worry about the things which do affect have a tangible effect on our military effectiveness, like our incomprehensible foreign policy in the ME since the 1970s.

            1. Nothing illegal does not equal nothing wrong. Trump is very mjuch wrong to intervene in 3 or 4 cases now, completely perverting military justice, discipline, and morale.

              Can't wait for an e-2 to appeal his dui on the basis that he is being punished more for dui than others are for murder.

              1. That's a perfectly reasonable comment. Lol.

              2. They have every right to appeal a Court Martial on whatever grounds. Of course the Judge Advocate would laugh their ass off and dismiss the appeal under your stupid scenario. Also, to be pendantic, they wouldn't be an E-2 if convicted of vehicular manslaughter and DUI. They'd be an E-1.

              3. "Can’t wait for an e-2 to appeal his dui on the basis that he is being punished more for dui than others are for murder."

                Has such a defense worked for people accused of mishandling confidential documents since other people have done so much worse than they?

              4. You’re so full of shit. All your service claims are suspect.

          3. Amazing how heroic the spooks and military brass have become ever since Trump got elected. It's almost like you're an unprincipled chunk of subhuman dog shit who will tell any lie and employ any fallacy in the service of your psychosis.

            Oh also, you're a Canadian fucking faggot. LMAO. MAGA. Kill yourself.

            1. I'm not Canadian, and you're not very smart.

              Come get me, bitch ass bitch.

              1. I will, you blue falcon

                1. "blue falcon"

                  Boot camp was a pivotal experience for you, eh? You still talk like a boot. Better go find your battle buddy.

                  1. The concept of a battle buddy is not reserved for boot camp (in the Army, which you claim to be a member of we referred to it as basic not boot, which is a Marine term as is boot).
                    And basic was a pivotal experience in all enlisted lives. It is where you go from being a civilian to earning the right to be called a soldier. I've never met a veteran who doesn't see basic as a pivotal moment in their lives.

                    1. I spent 2 straight years in military schools. Basic doesn't leave much of an impression by the end of that.

                    2. That is fucking impossible. There is no way you went to Q school straight out of AIT. Stop trying to pretend otherwise. It is impossible. There is no waiver allowed that would make that possible.

                    3. They are both misdemeanor crimes. Soldier, you are simply ignorant. Thousands of guys have gone straight from airborne to selection, with a brief stop at sopc.
                      Here, watch this:

                      (I went to the Q with Forum, who was on this show.)

                    4. Strike the misdemeanor sentence; it pulled part of my other comment into that one.

                    5. So many things liber says sound....., off. Like someone really trying hard to fake it and not getting it quite right.

              2. Come get me, bitch ass bitch.

                Unmask your email and he'll have the chance.

                1. No he won't. He's not getting out of his rascal for anything less than sex with his sister.

                  1. If you're that confident, then unmask your email.

                    Only a bitch-ass bitch says "come and get me" when you know that you're going to remain anonymous.

                    1. Only a bitch-ass makes repeated death threats and little masturbatory paragraphs about violent fantasies on the internet. I'm not letting some passive-aggressive loser sign me up for a bunch of spam, or whatever lame little come back he uses his ample free time to pursue.

                      If you are going to make death threats, don't expect me to help you carry them out. Do your own work. Hire a black hat. Jesus, you rascal drivers are lazy.

                    2. LOL--did you really just conflate death threats with getting spam or back talk? No wonder you're such a bitch-ass bitch who thinks government bureaucrats are the bee's knees.

                    3. "LOL–did you really just conflate death threats with getting spam or back talk?"

                      I didn't. But a dumbfuck who either doesn't know what the word "conflate" means, or has trouble with reading comprehension might think that.

                    4. Yeah, you did. You're just assmad that you got called on it.

          4. "Why why why the fuck would you trust him in matters of the military over dozens of people who have devoted their lives to service?"

            Benedict Arnold was in the military and was one of our most effective leaders in the Revolution.

            No need to question his judgment...

            1. McClellan would have won the war in 1862 if that grandstanding Lincoln hadn't sabotaged him.

              And don't get me started on how he protected that drunken butcher Grant after Cold Harbor....

              1. I'm not TOTALLY up on my US Civil War history... I read this over... ... Could one NOT argue that being CONSERVATIVE (and NOT charging head-long it defensive-positioned massive firepower, as Picket did at Gettysburg, and got his ass kicked), is WISE? Massed firepower was going up-up-up, so hunkering down in ditches and behind barricades may have been wise... Let the enemy get slaughtered in mass firepower, not us! Sit tight, ride it out, if your supply lines will support you! (So then Lincoln was wrong in urging McClellan to be more about, up-and-out of the ditches, "over the top", be more aggressive?)

                You got any links to educate me about why McClellan was a better bet than Grant? Do I score partial credit on the above?

                1. McClellan couldn't even score a decisive victory over Lee when he had Lee's own battle plans fall into his lap.

                  The best thing that can be said about him is that he at least molded the Army of the Potomac into a professional fighting force that was well-led at the brigade level and below, if not the command level. A lesser army probably would have deserted en masse after Burnside let Lee gain the high ground at Fredricksburg and proceeded to funnel his men into a meat grinder. However, Grant understood that the war would ultimately have to be one of attrition, and the South never had the manpower, industrialization, or resources (plus far too much jealous infighting amongst its generals) to force a conclusion, especially after Gettysburg.

                  Towards the end of the war, combat did evolve into one of defense and fortifications.

          5. De Espresso your a pussy.

            1. Is something no one says to me in person. Funny that.

      3. Squirrelly, I have a hard time believing you ever served in the military.

        1. My time in the military is a MAJOR source of my disbelief in the efficiencies of Government Almighty! Government Almighty is often semi-efficient at killing people, and breaking and destroying things, but other than that? Well OK, punishing / deterring other bad actors besides foreign despots, sometimes... Other than those things, Government Almighty is WORSE THAN USELESS!

          Anyway, I saw LOTS of waste and inefficiency and stupidity, in the military... Enough to turn me into a libertarian!

          1. Your time in the service convinced you of the government's ineffeciency. Finally something you and I agree on.

            1. It’s one of the only things he’s ever said that is true.

      4. You know what doesn’t lead to long-term peace and prosperity? Ignorant, stupid young kids like you and DOL being sent all over the globe and having to make such calls.

  13. "It's my generals who need lessons."

  14. "Not even the worst allegations here came close to My Lai...."

    ...but Greenhut still bases his entire column on that comparison.

    1. ... but the comparison is correct.

      1. Lol, no. But you keep making that comparison; it just makes you look silly.

        Never-Trumpers still haven't figured out that their ridiculous, over-the-top attacks on Trump actually help, not hurt, him.

        1. Trump is speed running Nixon. This is William Calley 2.0.

          1. Lol. Even the author of this retarded fucking drivel acknowledges that it's not even remotely the same thing. You should really consider drinking bleach, cytotoxic.

            1. Not cyto. I know you conspiracy folks like to mistake your reptile brain pattern recognition for world-class insight, but it's not. You are falling for a simple mental trick. Be better.

              1. Kill yourself either way.

                1. no u

                  1. Why? I’m big as life and twice as cute. Why would I ever want to kill anyone as awesome as I am?

            2. Even the author of this retarded fucking drivel acknowledges that it’s not even remotely the same thing.

              So we AGREE!!!!
              Bearded Spock is a bat-shit crazy liar!!!!

          2. Well, that means he's going to win by a landslide in 2020. From your mouth to God's ear, as the saying goes.

            And no, the Gallagher case is in no way, shape, or form like Calley's. Jesus, people, get some perspective.

            1. A majority of Americans want Trump impeached and removed.
              But Trump's idolaters see a landslide win!

              Trump said he won the Electoral vote by a landslide! (smirk)
              39,000 voters, in three states combined is a "landslide"

              1. Historical note: Nixon won 43% of the popular vote in 1968.

                He won 61% of the popular vote in 1972.

                But Trump's doomed for sure.

                1. I love that even Trump supporters compare him to Nixon now.

                2. ANOTHER cowardly diversion!!

                  A majority of Americans want Trump impeached and removed. But Trump’s idolaters see a landslide win!
                  Trump said he won the Electoral vote by a landslide! (smirk)
                  39,000 voters, in three states combined is a “landslide”

                  Historical note: Nixon won 43% of the popular vote in 1968.
                  He won 61% of the popular vote in 1972.
                  But Trump’s doomed for sure

                  TOTALLY non-responsive, PLUS irrational. And you've been manipulated by bullshit AGAIN! George Wallace (13% in 1968) did not run in 1972!ONE MORE TIME .. A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS WANT TRUMP IMPEACHED AND REMOVED.
                  Historical note (lol):
                  Gallup percentage supporting impeachment of
                  Bill Clinton: 19%
                  Richard Nixon: 23%
                  Anything else?

              2. Trump said he won the Electoral vote by a landslide! (smirk)

                304 to 227. Sounds like a landslide to me.

                39,000 voters, in three states combined is a “landslide”

                Why not compare like with like next time?


                  39,000 voters, in three states combined is a “landslide! (smirk)”

                  Why not compare like with like next time?

                  WHY do you continue being a TOTALLY IGNORANT (typical) TRUMPTARD?

                  That was Trump's winning popular margin in three states combined ... without which he'd have lost the EC also!!
                  Educate yourself

                  The most important states, though, were Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes. Those three wins gave him 46 electoral votes; if Clinton had done one point better in each state, she'd have won the electoral vote, too.

                  Or put another way: But for 79,646 votes cast in those three states, she'd be the next president of the United States.

                  You'll probably fuck up the math too!! Divide that number of VOTES by two for the number of VOTERS!!!

                  79,646 / 2 = 39,823 VOTERS.
                  Umm, if that handful of votes had not been switched by the combination of Russia, Wikileaks and Comey:
                  -39,823 fewer VOTERS for Trump
                  +39,823 more VOTERS for Clinton
                  =79,646 VOTE SWING

                  304 to 227. Sounds like a landslide to me.

                  Yeah, but you're an uneducated and/or brainwashed tribal partisan ... expressing absolute certainty on things you know NOTHING about ... but you've been programmed that way.

                  It has NEVER been my INTENTION to expose you as a TOTAL DUMBASS TRUMPTARD .,... now seven times on this page ... but YOU KEEP PUSHING (which may be your biggest mental handicap)

                  Was his inaugural crowd the biggest ever?
                  His tax cuts?

                  Anything else?

                  P.S. Posting your uninformed opinions is not a good tactic, against anyone who REPEATEDLY provides links to sources. Just sayin'
                  (Now he MUST punish me. Revenge)

                  1. So why not compare like with like next time?

                    1. (sneer)

            2. It isn't the pardon of a military member for killing civilians?

              1. There's a huge difference between killing civilians in the heat of battle, and planning and ordering and supervising a massacre of an entire village by your company.

                As much as people want to turn this into another My Lai, no it's not another My Lai.

                1. I'm not saying it's the same. Obviously we have two different cases here. But there are striking similarities. The foremost being a president perverting military justice in a trial that includes the killing of civilians as one of the charges.

                  1. "I’m not saying it’s the same. Obviously we have two different cases here. But there are striking similarities."

                    "I mean, they both involve the military. And there are other even MORE compelling similarities I'll get to eventually..."

                    How, uh, did Obama pardoning Manning impact discipline?

                    1. Nice attempt to completely misconstrue my words. nice tactic when you have no argument, but don't want to change your mind.

                      Here let me quote myself to you, "The foremost being a president perverting military justice in a trial that includes the killing of civilians as one of the charges."

                2. There’s a huge difference between killing civilians in the heat of battle, and planning and ordering and supervising a massacre of an entire village by your company.

                  The difference is INTENT, as in all crimes.

                  Or does the Trumpster defend the knowing and intentional killing of civilians .. if in wartime? How are you any better than Obama/

          3. Let’s see: you’re a fool who signed up to spread American empire around the globe and kill foreigners and now is trying to lecture other people about libertarianism.

          WHERE did he come even close to equating this with My Lai?
          Be specific. No more whining.

          For Trump's cult, ANY disagreement at all is the equivalent of a war crime.. an excuse to foment raving hysteria.

          Conspiracies everywhere!!
          THE SKY IS FALLING!!! 🙁

          1. What did the Koch bothers do when you showed them the screen shot of me calling you a fucking ignoramus?
            Did they pat you on the head and tell you I was a big meany?
            Fuck off and die, Hihn.

            1. Is Sevo BAT-SHIT CRAZY?

              What did the Koch bothers do when you showed them the screen shot of me calling you a fucking ignoramus?

              The defense rests (laughing hysterically)

              1. (laughing hysterically)

                So your normal state of being, then?

                1. (laughing hysterically)
                  So your normal state of being, then?

                  Only when I have an asshole to ridicule. (laughing hysterically)

                  I mean, you ARE humiliated seven time on this page ... all because EVERY assault was PROVEN to be based on your ignorance.

                  *Tell us again about Trump's Electoral landslide. (smirk)
                  *Your TOTAL fuckup on simple algebra,
                  *YOUR BLATANT BULLSHIT that you can prove you're a libertarian, while PROVING your contempt for the Non-Aggression Principle!! (which he will NOT understand) (smirk)
                  *When you say Socrates, Aristotle and Plato are MORONS - because Socrates made an ass of you, too.

                  And these beauties!

                  1. When you say Socrates, Aristotle and Plato are MORONS – because Socrates made an ass of you, too.

                    Watch a movie or two, idiot.

          2. Lol, other than the entire first half of the article being about My Lai, no Greenhut doesn't mention it at all.

            My bad. Must have been my imagination.

            1. Of course he *mentioned* it. He did more than mention it, he used it as historical context. As TheLibertyTruthTeller says above, he never *equated* anything with My Lai.

              1. No, it's just typical passive-voiced argumentation.

                "I'm not saying this is the same as My Lai, but here's how this could be seen as being like My Lai."

                1. He was very much openly, non-passively comparing reaction and attitudes to My Lai to reaction and attitudes toward the recent military cases. Comparing the reactions and attitudes toward the cases is different from equating the cases themselves.

                  1. Right, because the reactions should dictate the results. Thanks for confirming that it's all about the feelz.


              WHERE did he come even close to equating this with My Lai?

              Lol, other than the entire first half of the article being about My Lai, no Greenhut doesn’t mention it at all.

              WHAT DOES EQUATE MEAN? (sneer)
              Just like Trump. tell ANY lie that defends an earlier lie. DOESN'T MATTER if both are obvious lies to everyone. His base swallows everything said by the Chosen One ... which is how he trains them to do likewise ... as PROVEN by the My Lai bullshit, followed by anoa cowardly diversion.
              All for "the holy cause." Self-righteous militants, just like the manipulated followers of despots, for thousands of years.
              Like the "loyalty oaths" we saw, when the GOP's authoritarian base last seized control . - the raging hatred of McCarthyism

  15. The issue here isn't Trump's views on warfare. It's his crazed views on Muslims. All the victims were Muslim, who, as we all know, are subhuman animals. Even lower than the niggers and kikes, whose haters' violence he also defended, in Charlottesville.

    Just look at who Trump defends .....

    1. Normally I oppose the use of racial slurs. However I'll allow it in this case. Slurs are OK when you're putting them in the mouth of Drumpf.

    2. Here you go Hihn. Now run along and shoot yourself in the brain stem with a 10 gauge shotgun slug. Muslims actually are totalitarian pieces of subhuman shit, but even they are of more value than you. You have literally no reason to live. Everyone who has ever encountered you hates you, and have abandoned you to the care of the government as a welfare charge to suffer and die from senile dementia. You have no utility. You have no value. You are already on the verge of dying as a welfare pauper, unmourned. Kill yourself and save us the trouble of having to finance the continuation of your existence one more second.

      1. Jesus, what a masturbatory screed. Gross.

        1. Awwww is cytotoxic's Canadian pussy ass faggot feelings hurt? Maybe you could go visit Hihn in the home and suck his cock for him before the lights go out.

        2. It's a Sevo sock

          1. Makes sense.

        3. It's also accurate.

          1. ^ says the other public masturbator.

            1. Ask Dumbfuck Hihnsano about his bankruptcy.

              1. When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the losers.


                1. Socrates? Aristotle? Plato?


                2. Slander is a falsehood. You actually did declare Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

                  1. But when Trump does it in one of his many fictional entities, it means he is big brain smart man!

                    1. DOL's still assmad that Mueller Claus left him a stocking of coal.

        4. Fuck off Pedo Jeffy. Give America’s children an early Christmas present and commit suicide.

      2. PROOF!!!!

        Muslims actually are totalitarian pieces of subhuman shit

        How about niggers, fags and kikes? (/sarc)

        1. HIHN = MISEK

          1. Are you defending such extreme bigotry?

            1. No. I'm equating you with a known anti-semite.

              No wonder your equation is wrong. You don't even know what '=' represents.

                1) Believe Muslims are totalitarian pieces of human shit.
                2) Be an anti-semite.


  16. "America's moral authority"? That ship sailed a long time ago. The wars of aggression themselves destroy our moral authority. Blaming that loss on individual atrocities is nit-picking.

  17. NYT, Common Dreams, Washington Post. Not sure how seriously I should take the article when its sources are exclusively big-time leftist propaganda outlets.

    1. People who can't refute facts, attack the source instead.

      It's a logical fallacy, but it's also probably the only avenue you have left.

      1. Let's all make sure and keep this in mind the next time this or any of Hihn's other 5 sockpuppet accounts in this thread refuses to engage in facts linked from Fox News or Breitbart.

        1. Uhh, Sparky, to libertarians, BOTH partisan sides are useless. For only 50 years now. Plus you're full of shit. It was ME who cited Fox News, that a majority of Americans want Trump impeached.

          Left - Right = Zero
          Means you're the moral equivalent of a Berniebot.
          But ONLY the Authoritarian Right is so thuggish, burning books and censoring speech for centuries, Now, the New McCarthyism.

          1. You’re not a libertarian, and you tanked the LP. Not like a real libertarian such as myself. And the other libertarians who back our president.

            1. How crazy are they????

              and you tanked the LP.

              You are correct that I have sufficient power and influence to do so. But I did not. The LP is stronger than ever.

              Not like a real libertarian such as myself. And the other libertarians who back our president.


              Initial assault, Charlottesville-- Nazis and white supremacists attacking with clubs, against peaceful protesters
              "Alt-Left" standing peacefully, no visible clubs or bats.
              Alt-Right Fascists/Racists crash into them en masse, swinging clubs.
              Fascists are carrying the same shields as cops in riot gear. The motherfuckers CAME for violence.

              Next, PROOF Trump is a lying sack of shit.

              1. Part 2

                FASCIST TRUMP says Charlottesville violence was initiated by the alt-LEFT ... charging and swinging clubs at Trump's nazi and racist supporters.

                The video proves Trump a psycho .,.. as did his own DOJ!

                4 men charged in violent Charlottesville rally described as 'serial rioters"
                Three members of a white supremacist group were sentenced to prison Friday for kicking, choking and punching multiple people during the 2017 "United the Right" rally in Charlottesville

                and other rallies in California. The three were members of the California-based militant white supremacist organization "Rise Above Movement." ...
                A fourth defendant, Cole Evan White, will be sentenced at a later date, the attorney's office said.
                "These defendants, motivated by hateful ideology, incited and committed acts of violence in Charlottesville, as well at other purported political rallies in California," U.S. Attorney Thomas T. Cullen said. "They were not interested in peaceful protest or lawful First Amendment expression; instead, they intended to provoke and engage in street battles with those that they perceived as their enemies."
                THAT is Donald Trump (gag)

                Libertarians would NEVER defend such blatant abuse of power ... OR a lying sack of shit. So ... what does that say about Last of the Shitlords? PROOF or his unprovoked and infantile assaults (by a crazed stalker)

                Watch this thread.
                Trump's not the only psycho on the Authoritarian Right.

                1. Yep, you ruined the LP. You’re banned for what you did to them. Now you live on welfare, shilling for marxists like your prophet Obama.

      2. So pointing out the lack of balance in an article is a logical fallacy?


        1. You didn't do that. You implied that the New York Times, Washington Post, and Common Dreams (whatever that is) are categorically sources of news that you won't even consider.

          1. Which is correct. They condemn SEAL heroes, and write glowing obituaries of ISIS commanders. They are the enemy within.

          2. Common Dreams is a communist mouthpiece. Combine with NYT's sordid history (nevermind their self-proclaimed hit agenda against the current administration) and WaPo's longtime leftist bias and you might as well draw your sources from supermarket tabloids.

      3. Incidentally, Jason, my intention wasn't to refute the facts. I think Trump was wrong, esp. with Gallager. My post simply pointed out that what serves as research for Reason's increasingly proggy writers involves a quick scan of a batch of usual-suspects leftist "news" sources. Quoting Common Dreams is really no better than quoting Breitbart.

      4. And what “fact” is there to refute? The article is concerned that the US loses “moral authority”. Why the eff should we care? The US uses its “moral authority” to justify empire building and foreign wars.

        This damages America’s moral authority? It impedes America’s ability to deploy troops in foreign countries? Good!

  18. Is it fair to say that it's now official policy that there are no rules of war

    I hope so, but also that it'll always be officially denied.

    I'd be the one saying, "Stop killing yourself! Stop killing yourself!"

  19. If you're a convicted murderer on death row with a long chain of failed Federally-funded appeals, Reason will clutch at any straw to declare you innocent.

    If you've actually been acquitted of everything except a tasteless photograph, Reason will go ahead and call you a war criminal and clemency toward you an abdication of moral responsibility.

    1. And don't forget about the poor persecuted kiddie fuckers. Reason has never met a kiddie fucker that deserved punishment.

      1. Nor forget that the prosecutors gave immunity to the actual killer.

        Moral authority indeed.

        Meanwhile, Greenhut is a shameless hack.

        1. That was the funniest part. They gave him immunity, he said in court, "yeah I killed him," and blew their whole case to hell.

    2. I guess all those SEALs who reported him are ...what? And why shouldn't he suffer the consequences for the crime he was convicted of?

      1. Nobody reported him until they were leaned on by the prosecutor and given immunity. Just pretend he's a crackhead kiddie fucker convicted by an all-white jury and you should be able to grok it, cytotoxic. You're dumber than a fucking rock, but you can at least learn by analogy.

        1. You are wrong. The case originated due to Eddy's teammates reporting him.

          1. Reporting him for killing someone he didn't actually kill?

            Do you realize that only makes them less credible?

            1. There were several incidents that they reported. Are you saying all of them never happened? Or that some of them were unable to be proven?

              1. Are you saying all of them never happened? Or that some of them were unable to be proven?


              2. Pedo Jeffy, they reported him because he kept calling them on various failures and unwillingness to go on more dangerous missions.

                You ignorant little shit. Best you just focus on planning your suicide.

                1. I spent 11 years in sof. I'm not ignorant. You are the ignorant one here, by far.

                  No teammate, let alone several teammates are going to turn someone in for a framed murder for a professional dispute. That is so far fetched it is unbelievable.

                  But I'm not surprised you'd swallow it. You have proven yourself gullible and prone to falling for outlandish conspiracy theories, as evidenced by your unwavering support of a conman for pres.

                  1. You spent 11 years in SF, but got out in 2011 and claimed you went SF as an E-3 and was accepted before you were jump qualified and you never served in a line unit. Bullshit. I served from 1995-2005 and there is no way you could have done this. It's pure bullshit.

                    1. I spent 4 more years on a NG team after that. I wish you'd apply some of this critical detective work when it comes to questioning anything that Trump does.

                    2. And I keep telling you that you are completely ignorant of the 18x program apparently.

                  2. Yeah, you keep pointing out that you signed up for sof, which tells us that you are an unprincipled fool who is willing to kill for the US government in foreign wars. And now you claim moral authority to lecture others on libertarianism. I see little difference between you and the guys Trump pardoned.

                    1. So you welcome russian collaborators, but not veterans into libertarianism? Sounds about right.

                    2. I don’t know any Russian collaborators, libertarian or otherwise, so I can’t welcome them into anything.

                      I do know that anybody who voluntarily serves the American military-industrial complex is no libertarian, and your comments on this site show that you haven’t changed.

  20. The guys killed on the motorcycle by the Lt. turned out to be Taliban bomb makers.

    1. Which is unsurprising since similar attacks had already taken place and were the reason why force was used after they blew past multiple security checkpoints and ignored orders to stop.

      But Reason isn't going to let the facts get in the way of a good pro-Muslim, pro-terrorism, anti-American narrative.

      1. The irony of Trump supporters calling anything anti-american.

        1. Yes, because disagreeing with your narrative is Anti-American. Does the irony of your statement escape you.

          1. What "narrative" am I pushing? I merely point out proven facts, like Trump asked Russians for help in the 2016 election on TV in front of all of us. Then you Trumpies call me names or say I'm lying because you can't refute it.

            If pointing out obvious truths upsets your narrative, then examine what you believe. Don't shoot the messenger.

            1. He made a joke and said if they had Hillary's emails they should release them. He never asked them for help. You aren't pushing proven facts and call everyone who disagrees with you a Trumpista. That is a narrative, own it.

              1. Joking, sure thing. That's why the hack happened 5 hours after he "joked". What a knee slapper! I love presidents who joke about a little light treason.

                1. If you think presidents should be charged with treason for something like that, you really are crazy.

                  1. I think Americans who value sovereignty and the peaceful changeover of government power shouldn't vote for someone who does that. But sticking it to the libs feels that good, i guess.

                    1. Americans who value sovereignty and the peaceful changeover of government shouldn't support FISA warrants based off of foreign-sourced fan fiction and secondary source news articles.

                    2. But you still voted for Obama and Hillary, didn't you, you piece of shit?

                      How'd Obama's "peaceful changeover" work out in Libya?

                2. What's treasonous about exposing Hillary's muffin recipes?

                  1. Trading sovereignty in the process.

                    1. Hillary is not the state.

  21. I've come here many times and defended Trump against the TDS that has ravaged the deep state and the media including Reason. Not this time. Greenhut is dead on right here. We currently live in a police state wherein any cop in any jurisdiction can rob, rape, pillage, plunder and murder with absolute impunity. The military on the other hand has gained a reputation for not tolerating crimes against civilians. And yeah things like My Lai have a lot to do with that. I was around then and I still remember looking at the full color glossy spread of the aftermath in Life magazine. It was indefensible. Trump obviously has a hardon for men in uniforms. Cops and Soldiers. It is not a libertarian trait. And I frankly cannot see how anyone can support the NAP and the rule of law and defend this shit.

    1. What's a few completely innocent soldiers getting slandered and railroaded by corrupt prosecutors compared to assuaging your conscience over shit you saw in Life magazine half a century ago?

      Go fuck yourself you phony fucking piece of shit.

    2. In Lt. Laurence's case, the unarmed civilian was a Taliban bomb maker and had been ordered to stop but continued towards Laurence's troops position. Some of his platoon disagreed with his assessment of the situation but others supported him in that the motorcycle was acting in a hostile manner despite orders to stop. They were operating in a known hostile village and the Taliban has used motorcycles often in suicide bombing situations. They always make sure that the bombers are not visibly armed because they know our ROE's and use them against us. Laurence made a command decision that he felt was to protect his troops.

      1. My mistake the motorcycle rider wasn't the bomb maker, that was the guy killed by the Major referred to in this story.
        But the motorcycle rider was speeding towards US troops and did not slow down or stop despite being ordered to multiple times. That is considered a hostile action. The question is if you know the Taliban likes to use motorcycles with unarmed suicide bombers to attack US forces and one is speeding towards you, in a hostile village and ignored orders to stop, what do you order your troops to do?

        1. 9 of his platoon members testified against him. 5 of the soldiers who testified against him didn't even get any immunity or other promises from the prosecution.

          2 men refused the order to fire on the 3 afghan men, before the Lt eventually convinced a Pfc to open up. It was a clear cut case. No one who was there that day defends him.

          From :

          All these petitioners need to be shown what kind of man [Lorance] really is," said a soldier who served as a team leader in Lorance's platoon, who asked to speak on background because he is still on active duty. "This isn't a soldier that went to war and gone done wrong. This is a soldier that had a taste for blood and wanted to have that fulfilled. And he did, but in the wrong way."

          1. And those soldiers who refused were wrong and should have been court-martialed themselves for refusing to obey a lawful order.

            When confronted with that situation, the proper response is to eliminate the threat. That was a clear indicator of attack under the ROE. That it was even prosecuted is shameful. Lorance absolutely deserved the pardon.

  22. I guess I'm not the first to notice that Greenhut goes into the details of My Lai, but not into the details of the cases of the current batch of three alleged war criminals.

    How about laying out the general case against them, the defenses each made, and any funny business at their trials (if any) which should have been flagged?

    Or maybe this *is* a simply case of war criminals getting impunity. You wouldn't know from the article.

    1. Guilt by historical association is totes libertarian, doncha know.

    2. PS - Eddy the commenter (me) is quite different from the Eddy who got the pardon.

  23. "It is good that war is so terrible, for we grow fond of it."

  24. I have a good way to prevent U.S. war atrocities.

    1. Sensitivity training?

  25. OK, 23 year military veteran here who served in combat zones. I'm NOT saying I necessarily agree with all these pardons, however the article is missing some VERY important context:

    "President Donald Trump pardoned a former Army lieutenant who was convicted of ordering his troops to fire on unarmed civilians."

    Unarmed civilians on motorcycles that were approaching his platoon and ignoring multiple warnings to stop!

    "He granted a pardon to an Army major who had been awaiting trial for killing an Afghan man."

    An Afghan man who was a Taliban bombmaker!

    "Trump reversed the demotion of another officer, who had been acquitted of alleged war crimes charges but was convicted of a lesser charge of posing with a dead Taliban fighter."

    This is the one that has gotten the most press, and its the most ridiculous. To clarify, Trump didn't pardon him (Navy Chief Gallagher), he only reversed his demotion. Gallagher was sentenced to 4 months time served for posing for a photograph with a corpse. That sentence was a tad harsh for something that isn't even considered a crime in most contexts. Being demoted on top of that was excessive, and exactly what President intervention was intended to do.

    Now to be fair and add more context, there was abundant evidence that Gallagher committed other crimes, but he was found not guilty because the witnesses were contradictory and the prosecution greatly mishandled the case, they were even caught spying on the defense team!

    1. That’s a pretty good summary, with one more thing: Trump intervened a second time to stop a review of whether Gallagher should remain a SEAL.

      1. Which was them attempting to do an end around of what their Commander in Chief wanted.

        At that point Trump should have fired the entire chain of command.

        1. Them: "We're going to punish him for X and Y"
          POTUS: No you are not.
          Them: "Ok, then we will get him for Z"
          POTUS: "You are not getting the picture"

          1. Because if there's one thing we can count on from Trump, it's a deep and abiding sense of justice

        2. It is not. Any other SEAL who hadn't kissed Trump's ass and become a political football would be relieved after getting a UCMJ conviction.

          1. You don't know jack shit you lying poseur.

            1. I do. I know it sucks for your cognitive dissonance, but odds are I'm the only one in this thread who knows Eddy firsthand and has worked with SEALs in combat zones.

          2. As well as criticizing his chain of command on TV while still on active duty.

            1. Oh, suddenly we're critical of whistleblowers now?

              1. It’s quite a stretch to call that whistleblowing.

                1. If my chain of command is trying to buttfuck me for something I didn't commit, especially if it's a murder charge (and there's always going to be speculation as to why his buddy confessed), you damn well better believe I'm going to use every means I have available to get myself exonerated. Ironically, appealing to the Secretary of Defense and Commander in Chief is precisely how to follow the chain of command when the branch Secretary is personally looking to hang you.

                  1. Do you make these appeals by going on TV, publicly criticizing your chain of command, and mixing it with some t-shirt sales while you're at it?

                    1. So it's the methods that bother you?

                    2. It’s not about me. The point is that Gallagher wasn’t seriously following any appeals process by doing this.

                    3. It’s not about me.

                      You're certainly the one crying about it.

                      The point is that Gallagher wasn’t seriously following any appeals process by doing this.

                      I'd say he was pretty serious about not getting railroaded.

                    4. "You’re certainly the one crying about it."

                      We were having a discussion about the Gallagher case, where nobody was personally attacking anyone else, when you had to make it personally about me, with a non-sequitur about whistle-blowing no less:


                      "Oh, suddenly we’re critical of whistleblowers now?"

                    5. when you had to make it personally about me, with a non-sequitur about whistle-blowing no less

                      I asked if it was the methods that bothered you, and your first reaction was "it's not about me."

                      I never said it was "about you," but you seemed quite eager to climb on the cross for it.

                      As to your complaint about publicly criticizing the chain of command, there have been at least two incidents in the Air Force in the last four years regarding mold in the base dorms and buildings that were never corrected despite numerous complaints, year after year, until people started bitching about it on social media. Yeah, they could have gone through their "appeals process," but guess what got immediate results? Publicly airing the service's dirty laundry and bagging on their chain of command.

    2. Gallagher was sentenced to 4 months time served for posing for a photograph with a corpse.

      Which is hilarious because, after Pablo Escobar was killed, the DEA agent that had been chasing him for years was photographed with his corpse. Netflix even recreated the fucking thing for "Narcos." And I'm supposed to get bent out of shape because some ISIS subhuman piece of shit had his dead body photographed with a SEAL?

      1. I'd rather not call even an ISIS terrorist subhuman. How about a human being who happened to be an evildoer. Apparently doing evil from his own choice. Is there anything non-human in such behavior? Regrettably no.

  26. Is it fair to say that it's now official policy that there are no rules of war

    Not exactly. War is now like Calvinball. The rules are never the same twice.

  27. If P. S. Ruckman, the guy doing the Pardon Power blog, hadn't turned to the Dark Side and murdered his own kids and himself, he might have had some useful commentary on these cases.

  28. "War, war never changes."

  29. Meh, it's only a matter of time before qualified immunity is extended to the armed forces anyway. Why should cops and bureaucrats be the only protected classes?

    1. You have to say 'qualified immunity' with the South African villains in Lethal Weapon 2 (3? I forget). Who can forget when the bad guy said, 'Diplomatic immunity' just before taking a bullet to the head from Sgt. Murtaugh?

  30. "War is hell!"

  31. Just...WOW!

    It's hard to believe I used to actually recommend this place to people as a way to learn about libertarianism.

    What a shit-show!

    1. Railroading someone for a murder he didn't commit is libertarian?

      1. I wasn't in the courtroom. Nor were you. Nor was Trump.

        When all this went down I researched all three cases, as I hadn't been following any of them. I did so with a completely open mind. My conclusion, based upon the information I could find, was that all three individuals likely committed war crimes.

        It is libertarian to believe that protecting the rights of the individual is a legitimate function of government. If it's found that someone violated the rights of another that they be punished for it via due process of law.

        Gallagher, got lucky. His buddy (with immunity) covered for him. He wasn't being punished for the crimes he likely committed, he was being punished for violating a directive. His punishment reflected the severity of that violation, IMO.

        I don't believe Trump was correct, but he does have the authority to do what he did.

        But...all that said, I have a theory about why Trump did what he did...

        1. My theory:

          I think Trump truly believes that we aren't being successful in our foreign escapades because the soldiers hands have been tied with ROE. This was Trump's deluded way of telling the soldier, in the shit, "I've got your back."

          I understand why he is doing this. I don't believe he's correct in doing it, based upon the evidence I've seen.

          1. It is a consistent pattern with Trump in everything. He believes he knows more than anyone about almost any topic. He says so explicitly he is “stable genius” “the chosen one” he knows “more than the generals” the list of examples is endless.

            I have been around a lot of extremely smart and capable people. You find the occasional blowhard like Trump. That is not the person you want to work with.

            1. Bingo. I saw that in 37 years as a management and marketing consultant to business owners. The great ones MUST function as a team leader ,.. or be as incompetent as Trump.

              Before I spun off, still a salesman, I had a burning interest in management. I've never seen it in a book, but the great leaders always state the same high priority ... find and hire people better than me, for that responsibility.

              They KNEW, long before Trump, that ass-kissers are only good at ... kissing ass. That's why all of Trump's actual businesses FAILED, many in bankruptcies that screwed his own investors and suppliers. Real estate investors are NOT businesspeople. Also why he's such a huge failure at strategy and tactics -- which most learn (if they need to) in middle management.

              1. I am medical. It only works well as a team effort where one area of expertise can both trust and openly question the other. The effort breaks down if management or one part of that chain becomes toxic and destroys those lines of communication.

                If the surgical nurse cannot question the surgeon or intervene without fear and trust between each other as professionals bad things happen.

                That can happen when upper level loses focus on what we are trying to do here. Trump in his “i alone” style is the worst type of person you want. Instead of building and supporting the best teams he uses the fear style where anyone can lose their job and be humiliated if they do not tow the line. Never work there. I know this the hard way.

                1. Thanks. I assume that in the label "great one" as a team builder.
                  Business owners tend to hire a lot differently than others -- more team oriented or more authoritarian.

                  I can see that medical would be different (no "owner")
                  You made me appreciate something I saw in my own cancer treatment. (Boise's Mountain State Tumor Institute) Every week a "team" sits with me -- the PA, nurse and oncologist. They discuss an issue, as equals, for what they recommend. As I'm sure you know, each of the three sees a different part of it all. NOW you cause me to appreciate HOW they compare notes ,.. WITH me there! At least once, it was made clear that I'm free to draw my own conclusions (expert that I am!)

                  The entire staff is awesome, individually! I'm sure it goes with the job (attached to a major hospital), who applies there, not just the hiring selections.)

                  Thanks again!

                  1. Did you assume the label "great one" when you declared Chapter 7 bankruptcy?

                  2. There is another team you don’t see if they are a cancer treatment center. All of them have a tumor board where they review cases together. This will consist of oncology, radiation oncology, surgery, interventional radiology, and others.

                    1. No surprise. THAT is the collaborative Team Management we both admire. Originally, I had both chemo and radiation, where I could sense the collaboration was more than sharing my computer records.

                      It's the largest cancer treatment facility in a multi-state region.
                      "Mountain States" (for this) includes Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Utah and eastern Oregon. (Not all the Rocky Mountain states)

                      I actually counted the waiting room seating, during a wait, Over 100.


                    2. You are a fighter.

                      Fight on.

          2. That's because Trump has spent his entire adult life with absolute authority, owner of a family business.

            That's all Trump has ever known. No rules or restraints on his "feelings" ... a right-wing snowflake!

            Thus, his total failure as a businessman transfer to his total failure as President. Same reason. The authoritarian mentality so beloved by his core base.

        2. Thank you!

  32. Trump loves him some murderers, as long as they are murdering people he doesn't like.

    Trump saying he would like to invite the murderers to campaign events show that he thinks his supporters feel that way too.

  33. He is not correct in his judgment. This is a great injustice that is done.

  34. So Trump is willing to Pardon someone who ordered to Fire on Civilians, yet is doing nothing for Assange and Snowden... That tells you allot

  35. The military shadow leaders need to be fired and fire there bosses. 911 happened because the fbi and cia refused to share info.

  36. While Reason spits on veterans and the troops, REAL AMERICANS know Trump is a better president than Abraham Lincoln

    53% of Republicans
    22% of Independents
    10% of Black Americans
    6% of Democrats



      1) Only 25% of ALL Americans say Trump is better than Lincoln. 🙂
      2) YOU say ONLY Republicans are REAL Americans!!!!!!!

      Today's GOP is crazier than we thought. if this insanity is typical of their morals and intelligence. (shudder)

      But Trump gave him a "loyalty cookie!"

      1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

  37. "Common Dreams argued that the president's action conforms to 'a pattern of refusing accountability for violations of international law and a litany of war crimes over recent decades'."

    There are more than a few grains of truth to that. For example, how many people were punished for the torture that the CIA got up during the Bush Administration? Not one. Nothing at all was done during the Bush administration, while Obama infamously claimed he wanted to look forward rather than back. (Obama arguably also buried the Senate torture report. Places like the State Department refused to even read it!)

    Another example: during WW2 there were literally thousands of rape cases reported involving US miitaary personnel. Hardly any were investigated, let alone punished.

    Yet another example: during the Abu Gharib scandal the only people who were put on trial were enlisted personnel; and those convicted received comparatively light sentences. Not a single officer was put on trial. The brigadier general who ran the jail and several others were dealt with administratively such as being demoted or relieved of command. As for CIA personnel and contractors who were allegedly involved, they all escaped scott free.

    Yet another example: Calley was the only person put on trial for the My Lai massacre even though he was hardly the only person who involved in that massacre. Nor (AFAIK) was any attempt made to at least discipline anyone higher for what happened. The buck stopped with Calley. That conveyed the impression that Calley weas being unfairly singled out, which in turn was arguably why there was afterwards public pressure to pardon him.

    More examples: how many people were put on trial for such war crimes as the firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo, not to mention Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Or the drone killings that are going on even now?

    If al Qaeda or some other terrorist group committed such atrocities on American soil, the US would track the perpetrators to the ends of the Earth. Yet when the US does the same thing it prefers to look the other way. The only reason the My Lai and Abu Gharib prosecutions went ahead at all was because of public pressure. Without that nothing at all would have happened; and even then all that DID happen was to offer a sacrificial goat or two from the services. The higher level officials who were (arguably) equally guilty all escaped.

    1. Hiroshima and Nagasaki

      We had intel saying the Japanese were going to fight on no matter what. They had to be shocked out of that notion. It worked. And we only needed to use 2 of the 3 bombs available at the time.

      So no. Not war crimes.

      Estimates (how good?) are that the bombs prevented a million US casualties. And at least that number of Japanese.

      1. MSimon: "Estimates (how good?) are that the bombs prevented a million US casualties."

        First if all that's sort of starting to sound like you would label those 100,000 civilian deaths as justifiable homicide.

        Secondly, suppose the roles had been reversed. Suppose the Japanese had dropped two (atomic) bombs on two US cities, killing around 100,000 Americans, most of them civilians (just as most the murdered inhabitants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilians), in order to force Washington, DC, to surrender and thereby avoid the need for a Japanese invasion of the American mainland, thereby saving a million Japanese SOLDIERS (as distinct from civilians) from being killed, you would NOT consider those (civilian) American deaths to be a war crime either?

        That's starting to sound like the sort of excuse the German Nazis might have deployed to excuse the genocide of six million Jews. (Namely, they needed to kill six million Jews to save millions more of the Master Race. Do you really think that sort of excuse would have passed muster at Nuremberg?)

  38. Google is now paying $17000 to $22000 per month for working online from home. I have joined this job 2 months ago and i have earned $20544 in my first month from this job. I can say my life is changed-completely for the better! Check it out whaat i do.....

    click here =======►►

  39. When I was a kid, I was taught that my actions were a reflection of my family's morality. I still believe that is true. The author correctly states that the Army covered up My Lai, or at least tried to. This is not a one off. If we look to the Tailhook scandal in the Navy, or even more recently the attempts to pin a turret explosion on a single enlisted man, the military has a long history of scapegoating and covering up. The actions of soldiers on the battlefield are a direct reflection of the rot that infects the highest command. In any case, America's "moral authority" has lately been a fiction. IMO, you don't get to invade a sovereign country against their will to fight a third party, destroying innocent lives and property along the way, and claim any sort of moral authority.

    1. Thanks. I can't agree on all of that, but it's refreshing to see so thoughtful a comment, especially here.

      1. Fuck off and die, Hihn.

        1. Thanks. I can’t agree on all of that, but it’s refreshing to see so thoughtful a comment, especially here.

          1. If a thought ever crossed your mind, Hihn, it would die of loneliness.

            Go back to drowning in self-pity over your failed political career and stop spamming threads.

      2. The KGB can only be attacked in Russia. If they operate in Poland you have to leave them alone.

        1. Unless it's crackers to slip a rozzer, the dropsy in snide.
          And Putin is wearing pink underwear.
          Unless it's snowing in Puerto Rico.

  40. The most intellectually dishonest piece on 'reason,' and that's saying something. Lead with a strawman, fade out on implied nazis -- nice. What you forget is is that the soldiers pardoned by Trump did nothing wrong. But apparently 'reason' prefers Forgotten Valor. Don't bother to thank me for my service, Greenhut and all the slime molds who think like him.

    This comment not approved by Silicon Valley brain slugs.

  41. De Oppresso Liber
    November.29.2019 at 10:14 pm

    The War in Afghanistan had the same purpose as the War in Laos. Poppies.

    The Politics of Heroin, CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade by Alfred McCoy - Chicago Review Press

    1. The poppy trade definitely complicates things there. I saw operations slow way down to allow the supposed enemy to harvest poppy. I don't think, or at least haven't seen evidence that the war was initiated because of CIA ambitions in the drug trade, though.

      1. You saw operations from where? The mess hall cook line? The motor pool? Because you damn sure weren't an operator or an analyst.

  42. So Gallagher was jailed for posing in a picture with a bunch of other folks who weren't charged, he was acquitted of the charge of murder, the prosecutors engaged in misconduct, and Reason is going to persist with the "war criminal" label.

    I guess dedication to justice and due process go right out the window for Reason cosmotarians when they see a chance to attack Trump.

    1. +100

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.