Anonymous #2 3d

Yes everyone at the top is involved both red and blue. However! It’s the sitting president that was best buds with Epstein and actively (and happily) participated in his trafficking network

4

Anonymous OP 3d

There is no prof of that.

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

Oh there is

6

Anonymous OP 3d

Just some bullshit to distract people from the shit policy coming from the left. You ever notice how the left never proposing any new ideas, just personally attacks people with their buzz words. Nazi, rapist, pedofile, racist, xenophobic,transphobic, fascist, etc. etc. etc.

-3

Anonymous OP 3d

Yeah a random note about a prominent public figure is definitely proof. Additionally, everyone with conditions to Epstein didn’t know what he was involved in

-3

Anonymous #2 3d

Connections

-2

Anonymous #2 3d

projection. party of fiscal responsibility my ass. you're coping, dems aren't in power so there's literally no shit policy to be had. yall control all three branches and look what ya got. bunch of yalls stupid culture war bullshit and gas at $4. dumb fuck

7

Anonymous #3 3d

We control the government. I don’t think you understand what that means. A large part of the shit we want to do requires a supermajority or a 2/3 vote. Which is the reason you fucks keep shutting the government down. And you don’t understand the greater scope of the war.

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

You could nuke the filibuster. And you just need 60 votes with the filibuster, not 66/67

4

Anonymous #2 3d

Thus, my claim about potentially saving millions of Americans still stands. Additionally, hurting china now is still the best option given my peace through strength beliefs. We need to be so far on top china would have to be dumb to start a war with us.

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

Jesus Christ you’ve been telling people they’re committed to start a war in 2026 and your only evidence is that they want a competent navy?

6

Anonymous #4 3d

Yeah that’s my bad bro😂😂😂

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

Starting a war in Iran is *NOT* peace through strength and will NOT hurt them as much as you think 😭 they’ll just find someone else to get oil from

4

Anonymous #4 3d

But aye we gonna be prepared for it. Which is always the best decision. Thus, my ultimate point of needing to hurt china still stands.

-1

Anonymous #2 3d

You’re a clown 😭

5

Anonymous #4 3d

The call it the century of humiliation and you think they just want to have a capable military. They regularly violate sovereign Taiwanese waters, ram their fishing vessels, and you believe they just want to have a adequate military. You sir are the clown or either extremely dishonest.

0

Anonymous #2 3d

You specifically said that they SAID they would go to war in 2026. That is untrue, and everyone with any modicum of knowledge on the subject knows China doesn’t talk like that

5

Anonymous #4 3d

Starting a war with a smaller opponent to weaken a larger one is pretty smart. I don’t want a war with china, but I don’t mind paying $10 more a week for gas. Find someone else to buy the oil from? Yeah that’s why they’re tapping into the national reserves of oil. Additionally, why were they buying from Iran in the first place? That was the cheapest option, simple economics. They will now need to pay more, and buy from a potentially more western aligned country.

0

Anonymous #4 3d

But its completely dishonest to deny the fact that a buildup in military assets is most likely in preparation to an invasion of a country they’ve been harassing for god knows how long

0

Anonymous #2 3d

They buy plenty from Russia too. They’ll likely go to Brazil next

1

Anonymous #4 3d

Russia already pretty damn strained. Also Brazil is significantly more western aligned as Iran, which proves my point.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

So when we keep building up our assets, what does that mean? We’re preparing a war against a specific country and already have a secret timeline? And this goes for every country?

1

Anonymous #4 3d

If we were harassing another country, ramming their fishing vessels, violating sovereign their waters, claiming that the country originally belonged to us, then yes I absolutely would.

1

Anonymous #2 3d

Brazil is strategically independent like India (who also gets oil from Iran and Russia). They’re not neatly western-aligned, especially as BRICS members. The most logical choice for China is Russia, which means they’ll continue funding the war in Ukraine

1

Anonymous #2 3d

We basically did that in Venezuela

1

Anonymous #4 3d

It cost Iran $10-$20 to produce a barrel. Brazil and Russia $25-$40 to produce one. How much do you think that will cost with china being the largest importer of oil on the planet taking in 11.5-12 million barrels DAILY🤔🤔

1

Anonymous #4 3d

And then we literally kidnapped their president. That proves my point, that should have started a war.

0

Anonymous #2 3d

Don’t forget Saudi Arabia (not quite western aligned) and Iraq are major suppliers too. China imports the same amount from each of them as they do from Iran. And they will not listen to the US if we ever told them to stop giving them oil

1

Anonymous #2 3d

How in the fuck does that prove your point. We left the rest of Maduro’s regime in power and no oil company has significantly changed their stance on investing there 💀 that was pointless, risky, and hurts our efforts to get others to comply with international law

1

Anonymous #4 3d

You made the case that china could just be building up military assets. I said that’s not likely given the levels of harassment Taiwan has been subjected to. You then said we basically did the same thing to Venezuela. So you proved my point that acting this way does suggest a potential conflict in the near future, such as kidnapping a president. 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️

1

Anonymous #2 3d

I was wondering if you had the same opinion of the US. However, we were building up our assets far before Trump laid eyes on Venezuela

1

Anonymous #4 3d

Still it suggests a conflict. Venezuela actually worked out well for the US. I’m really against the whole dictator, drug dealer thing, ya know?

1

Anonymous #2 3d

No, I don’t really know, because we just pardoned a former president and drug dealer 😭

1

Anonymous #4 3d

Don’t even get me started on the pardoning bruh. Biden pardoned over 8000 people, one of which, Kaboni savage was convicted of killing 12 people by firebombing a house. Another was convicted of killing a mother and her 8 year old chil(Adrian peeler). Truthfully we need to take pardoning powers away, democrat or republican.

0

Anonymous #2 3d

Kaboni Savage wasn’t pardoned, his death sentence was commuted to life in prison 😭

1