War on ISIS Under Trump Set to Double Civilian Death Toll Compared to Obama

newsweek.com/president-trumps-isis-war-course-double-obamas-civilian-deaths-637538

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/a1Z32
youtube.com/watch?v=3tpHILeOSV8
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Remember to archive
archive.is/a1Z32

Good.

>Good.

This is why 9/11 happened

I really don't care. Is this thread suppose to convince me to be a dirty fucking neocon and invade Syria to "save" civilians? If so fuck off. I would literally vote for a communist over a neocon like McCain, Cliintons, and Bush family any day.

>Is this thread suppose to convince me to be a dirty fucking neocon and invade Syria to "save" civilians?

No it's the coincidence the opposite you retard. trump is the one killing civilians and being the neocon.

I don't give a shit

>he still believes arab terrorists did 9/11
user, I....don't know how to tell you this

Good
Less muslims
Trump winning for the 896734874th time since election day

>future thing will be bad because trump, plz blv

GWB killed like 3 million Muslims as president. I guess that's winning as well.

Oh no more dead sandniggers, anything but that!!!

>I don't give a shit

So why should we care if more burgers die overseas?

Right we should go over there and kill more sand niggers for Israel!

>estimated that the coalition killed over 2,200 civilians in ISIS-held territory in Iraq
>COALITION KILLED
>fuck trump

This is what's called fake news.
Also:
>Letting ISIS to gain territory, and don't do anything, but support them
>Actually fighting against them
>???
>muh civilian death

>Letting ISIS to gain territory,

Nice neocon propaganda. You can oppose ISIS while at the same time not want to be involved in the fighting there.

Its an /sg/ refugee coming over to baw about muh based Syrians

>Its an /sg/ refugee coming over to baw about muh based Syrians

Fuck off you fucking faggot. Someone of us aren't Trump bootlickers like you.

>newsweek can time travel

yep

nice flag faggot, I bet your a leaf behind that

>ISIS held territory
>"Civilians"
All civilians are dead, there's only "civilians" and bakeries.

>More dead kebab
Good
Then we have a reason to remove more kebab

Rather their civilians than ours.

>Then we have a reason to remove more kebab

Onward Christian soliders

Are you under the impression that it's not?

Are we hating sandniggers that stay in their country now? Sounds like something a degenerate would say.

Archive your links

>Rather their civilians than ours.

You may not realize this, but you are literally parroting neocon talking points. At what point did Sup Forums turn full blown neocon? You didn't support this under Obama, but ever since the orange turd you support it.

>Muslim
>civilian
No such thing. You have to have a civil society before you can be called a civilian. These women/kids are just human shields. Are we supposed to never fight enemies who use human shields? Do you know anything about war?

>Are we hating sandniggers that stay in their country now?
We hate all sandniggers, Muhammad.
You have to go back

>3 million
Could have kept winning to 6 :)

>"""""""""""Civilians""""""""""""""

>Are you under the impression that it's not?

You start illegal overseas to destabilize the middle east, but complain about refugees.

You sound like a desperate turkroach.

>communist
>concern for life

Pick one, hypocrite.

Oh nooo... That sucks!

Why are we still "at war" with ISIS?
Let whoever else wants to sacrifice blood and treasure try their luck. It's not like whatever we do has made a difference.

Since it's (planned) it must be right.

youtube.com/watch?v=3tpHILeOSV8

Which international law was broken by invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

"""civilians"""

i don't care what flag the muslims who die are representing.
The u.s could throw bombs into every muslim capital in the m.e and i would celebrate it

There are a lot of bad people, more so for non whites but still a sizeable number among whites. They should all be killed (including yourself)

And i thought this was a nationalist board, silly me.

>Which international law was broken by invading Afghanistan and Iraq?

War of aggression you fucking tard

Taliban and Saddam didn't do shit to us

>Trump Set to Double Civilian Death Toll Compared to Obama
Well, he really likes to challenge himself, doesn't he.

Good, let's hope it triples. Bomb em all

It's made a huge difference since Trump has been in office. ISIS is almost non-existent today.

Oy vey, goyim. (((Jewsweek))). They really don't even try anymore.

>Good, let's hope it triples. Bomb em all

You should change your flag.

I am the world police USA

i oppose something

but i don't do anything

also i'm founding it.

leddit

spacing

you

have

to

go

back

>"civilians"
>newsweek

fuck off.

'civilian'

Except ISIS is actually suffering large defeats now in syria and iraq. they had free reign for the last 8 years in comparison which made all of those civilian deaths completely meaningless

All of a sudden they care about civilian deaths?

Ooooh nooooo, that sucks.

>Except ISIS is actually suffering large defeats now in syria and iraq.

And when ISIS 2.0 shows up? You think this will end? War on terror will never end.

Every dead muslim is another victory for Trump.

Very good.

>k9TqXYUJ
>15 posts by this ID

#SAD #Shill

>War of aggression
lol whut? Could you show me that statute? Also, those weren't ears of aggression. We were trying to dismantle Muslim jihadist networks that participated in 9/11 and earlier terrorist attacks that our cuck Clinton let happen.

>Every dead muslim is another victory for Trump.

Yes Muslims like the ones in Saudi Arabia? Dumb Trumpfags are dumb.

They were just statistics now they're propaganda.
Ultimately (((they))) don't really care about us... i mean, them...
catchy song

This guy gets it.

Terror is synonymous with Islam.

well ideally no one would be over there to start with, at least if I was in charge. but Im not, and ISIS 1.0 IS getting destroyed, which is the objective they're pursuing so you can't say its not working.

>Could you show me that statute?

The relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations mentioned in the RSICC article 5.2 were framed to include the Nuremberg Principles. The specific principle is Principle VI.a "Crimes against peace", which was based on the provisions of the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal that was issued in 1945 and formed the basis for the post World War II war crime trials. The Charters provisions based on the Nuremberg Principle VI.a are:

Article 1:

The Purposes of the United Nations are:

To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

Article 2, paragraph 4

All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

Article 33

The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.

Article 39

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.[16]

And?

They are both sunni, so... yes?

you need to shitpost better.

Good.

>you need to shitpost better.

You are a neocon, just admit it.

This statute is to prevent countries from annexing other countries. You know, like when Saddam annexed Kuwait and we went in there to stop it? You consider that a "war of aggression"? Lol you Western sandniggers are worse than Western liberals with your purposeful obfuscation.

Ok

you shouldn't

Are they going to stay non-existent once the daily airstrikes stop? We had Iraq almost secured too at one point, and as soon as PM Maliki told us to get out after 2008 they broke into pieces with the Taliban taking back land and power. I have zero faith that any of these sectarian-motivated groups will ever be defeated on their home-turf. There is no successful historical examples to point to.

>This statute is to prevent countries from annexing other countries

>let me spew some bullshit
>let me talk out of my ass

No, he doesn't get it.

Theres a difference between fighting insurgency, and your normal random bombings, versus fighting an actual terrorist state with captured territory.

You fight ISIS with machines of war.

Once we're back in insurgency, then its a war of ideas, and stopping safe harbor.

>Are we hating sandniggers that stay in their country now
No were killing them, it's much better this way.

So he started actually fight them, instead of pretending together with Israel and "accidentally" dropping on them american supplies instead of bombs? Good for him.

No I'm not a drumpf bootlicker
He's working with Russia on sorting out the Syria problem

I just don't have a hardon for indo europeans like so many of you

i love it

Alt-right is a neocon controlled op movement. It's a psy ops created to turn edgy kids into neocons. Prove me wrong. You see all these kids on here cheering war.

>Trump ordered to kill more civilians
lmao

>He's working with Russia on sorting out the Syria problem

He's expanded the war in Syria you dumb faggot. We have US ground troops in Syria. He's pushing us further and further toward nuclear war.

Trump complains about Assad gassing people, but kills 2,000 civilians in 6 months.

>War

But Obama blowing up weddings and funerals is better!

>But Obama blowing up weddings and funerals is better!

Neither is good. Why do you assume we like Obama?

I find it hypocritical how the right criticized civilian deaths under Obama, but carry water for Trump.

>we have ground troops in Syria

They've been there for a while. They're working with Jordan
The coalition kurds won't last, they'll be routed out once this is all settled

You sound like degenerate Neo-Nazi Untermenschen. Hitler allied with all sorts of nationalist countries and you laugh about the death of the civilians of the last fucking secular country in the middle east?

Such vile ideology is beneath me. Either you're shills or simply sub-human.

>, they'll be routed out once this is all settled

Yes because US interventions always end well and not towards more conflicts.

Trump has expanded the wars, he is not any better than Hillary.

Okay :)

Trump supporters in general did not want Barry's war from Syria.

Speaking of hypocrisy, how come lefties were so silent under Obama's warS? Obama had the longest war than any other US president in history, why no concern for life under Pressure Barry, hypocrite?

>Saddam didn't do shit to us
Petrodollar you dumb shit

>Trump supporters in general did not want Barry's war from Syria.

Trump supports support bombing assad, 86% of them.

>Petrodollar you dumb shit

Wow so you openly admit the Iraq War was only about oil and enriching corporations and not about our self defense? Unless you think exploitation of the third world is in our "defense."

WTF kind of bullshit source is this? When the 2016 election was in progress, many more legit sources showed Americans in general, overwhelmingly did no want more wars after Bush and Barry.