[RIslander]

(06-07-2017 04:03 PM)AManLikePutin Wrote:  

[/url]

What a cuntish thing to say. Guess the same logic applies to US, UK, & France too (As we've Literally seen it last week where London attacker fought vs. Gaddafi and Assad in Libya and Syria as a UK/US backed rebel, then went on to kill UK citizens).

Anyways, it's clear that Trump has chosen to support terrorists. That Saudi $$ must have felt good, and I was naive enough to think just because Trump is already rich, he won't be subdued to moral corruption by Saudis. I still support him when it comes to PC culture, immigration and the wall...but he can simply fuck off with his "terrorism" stance. He supports them (knowingly or unknowingly), bombs the only official army that's fighting ISIS, and then gives billions of dollars of arms to the state sponsor of ISIS.

And bore off with the 5D Chess theories (It's an insult to the beautiful game of chess that I've professionally played) of "Keep your friends closer, but your enemies closer". It's the same retarded notion of "Don't offend muslims, if you don't want terror attacks", "accept more muslim immigrants to prevent next terror attacks". That's the equivalent of the 5D chess crowd of "keep your enemies closer".

[url=https://twitter.com/RT_America/status/870654878229594112]

Trumps recent behavior has been leading me to believe he's a Saudi cuck. To say such a thing about terrorism in Iran is extremely biased and straight up disrespectful. It also sounds to me like a canned response to an event he knew of beforehand. Would he of said that about an attack in Saudi? I have to agree with many statements in your post... but I also tend to think that geopolitically speaking, Saudi is a necessary ally to the US, even though I fucking hate them and everything they stand for.