General Discussion

Miles Archer

(22,865 posts) Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:19 PM 10 hrs ago

112

Ro Khanna SAYING THIS about Trump's war is a big deal, but...saying it on FOX "NEWS" is an even BIGGER deal.

See, here's PROOF that brevity and clarity of thought nullifies the need for anyone to probe the deep psychological motivations of Trump.

He's basically writing his name all over the White House walls with his own poop.

So Khanna just fucking CUTS TO THE CHASE and DOESN'T BEAT AROUND THE BUSH and I'd say we need MUCH more of that from our elected members of Congress, in BOTH PARTIES.

Because what I am seeing right now is Hegseth and Trump, high on toxic masculinity and testosterone, with a flag in one hand and their dick in the other, waving both and bellowing about giving "no quarter" to END A CRISIS THAT THEY CREATED, that DID NOT EXIST until Trump decided we were getting too close to the Epstein files, so he bombed Iran.

Aaron Rupar

‪@atrupar.com‬
Khanna on Fox News: "There was no imminent threat. Now there's a threat to the United States. We've created a threat."

Khanna on Fox News: "There was no imminent threat. Now there's a threat to the United States. We've created a threat."
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-03-15T15:43:05.358Z

17 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ro Khanna SAYING THIS about Trump's war is a big deal, but...saying it on FOX "NEWS" is an even BIGGER deal. (Original Post) Miles Archer 10 hrs ago OP

republicans have created a threat. framing, dear Ro nt msongs 9 hrs ago #1

The only thing I object to is his use of "we" senseandsensibility 9 hrs ago #2

I hear you, and without second-guessing him, I will assume he said that because... Miles Archer 9 hrs ago #4

That is the crux of it - In broadly general terms jfz9580m 8 hrs ago #9

Yes, broad AND general Miles Archer 5 hrs ago #16

DURec leftstreet 9 hrs ago #3

North Korea was the bigger threat multigraincracker 9 hrs ago #5

.... and North Korea actually HAS atomic weapons now---- why is why neither Bush nor Trump attacked them--- Jack Valentino 3 hrs ago #17

I was over the dick-wagging years ago. And it is sadly as clear as glass... littlemissmartypants 9 hrs ago #6

K&R spanone 9 hrs ago #7

Well, this isn't a war for the interests of the United States. David__77 9 hrs ago #8

Correct and simply stated. erronis 7 hrs ago #11

Iran was about to take away our freedoms until Trump saved us IronLionZion 7 hrs ago #10

Iran is gonna TAKE OUR JOBS Bluetus 7 hrs ago #12

Legal experts alarmed over Pete Hegseth's 'no quarter' statement LetMyPeopleVote 6 hrs ago #13

He's such a leader! pattyloutwo 5 hrs ago #14

MS NOW- The dangerous significance of Pete Hegseth's 'no quarter' Iran war pledge LetMyPeopleVote 5 hrs ago #15

msongs

(73,623 posts)

1. republicans have created a threat. framing, dear Ro nt

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:25 PM

9 hrs ago

senseandsensibility

(24,815 posts)

2. The only thing I object to is his use of "we"

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:27 PM

9 hrs ago

Please substitute trump or spineless republicans, as in "trump has created a threat".

Miles Archer

(22,865 posts)

4. I hear you, and without second-guessing him, I will assume he said that because...

Reply to senseandsensibility (Reply #2)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:39 PM

9 hrs ago

...it's basically the Pottery Barn Rule. Break it and you bought it. If Trump invaded Iran, then America invaded Iran, whether America agreed with it or not.

And since John Roberts' "YOU ARE ABOVE ALL LAWS OF MORTAL MEN" benediction, Trump seems to enjoy the things America DOESN'T AGREE WITH more than the ones that that DO agree with.

As much as I'd like to detach myself from Trump, fully, when he invades Iran, he drags us along for the ride.

jfz9580m

(17,038 posts)

9. That is the crux of it - In broadly general terms

Reply to Miles Archer (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 03:54 PM

8 hrs ago

Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, or were this India (as that is where I am), whether you are BJP, Congress, CPI, another of our gazillion parties, when your group invades a sovereign nation, everyone can expect to be held responsible by the victim.

Miles Archer

(22,865 posts)

16. Yes, broad AND general

Reply to jfz9580m (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 06:35 PM

5 hrs ago

I'd be willing to bet that there are few people in Iran right now ruminating over who in America is "for" Trump, and who is NOT...and, as we all know, if what they get is second-hand media reports in which Trump attempts to make himself the center of the Universe, it would be simple to come to the conclusion that "America is behind it," not "Trump went rogue because Roberts said he could, and America is repulsed."

leftstreet

(40,298 posts)

3. DURec

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:28 PM

9 hrs ago

multigraincracker

(37,497 posts)

5. North Korea was the bigger threat

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 02:51 PM

9 hrs ago

The nut that runs that country has ICBM that can reach us.

Jack Valentino

(4,902 posts)

17. .... and North Korea actually HAS atomic weapons now---- why is why neither Bush nor Trump attacked them---

Reply to multigraincracker (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 09:09 PM

3 hrs ago

a lesson for every other nation in the world who do not yet have nuclear weapons.....

littlemissmartypants

(32,973 posts)

6. I was over the dick-wagging years ago. And it is sadly as clear as glass...

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 03:00 PM

9 hrs ago

That communication skills refresher classes are past due for our government leaders. The messaging is not only haphazard, but divisive and sometimes even blatantly dumb.

spanone

(141,403 posts)

7. K&R

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 03:02 PM

9 hrs ago

David__77

(24,594 posts)

8. Well, this isn't a war for the interests of the United States.

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 03:06 PM

9 hrs ago

erronis

(23,660 posts)

11. Correct and simply stated.

Reply to David__77 (Reply #8)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 05:10 PM

7 hrs ago

IronLionZion

(51,148 posts)

10. Iran was about to take away our freedoms until Trump saved us

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 04:30 PM

7 hrs ago

Be grateful

Bluetus

(2,690 posts)

12. Iran is gonna TAKE OUR JOBS

Reply to IronLionZion (Reply #10)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 05:14 PM

7 hrs ago

LetMyPeopleVote

(178,969 posts)

13. Legal experts alarmed over Pete Hegseth's 'no quarter' statement

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 05:53 PM

6 hrs ago

Hegseth is firing JAG officers and reorganizing the JAG office because he wants to commit war crimes. Hegseth just committed a war crime by promising that "No Quarter" will be given to any enemy of the trump administration

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's offhand remark that the U.S. would show "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies," in Iran.
— Raw Story (@rawstory.com) 2026-03-14T03:00:29Z

https://www.rawstory.com/pete-hegseth-2676101135

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's offhand remark that the U.S. would show "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies," in Iran. In military context, "no quarter" means killing enemy combatants without allowing surrender.

This alarmed legal experts, who warned the statement could constitute a war crime. Even just saying it could count as a violation of international law and U.S. military code, they added.

Wall Street Journal national security reporter Alex Ward flagged the comment as violating international humanitarian law under the Geneva Convention.

Claremont McKenna College professor Jack Pitney cited the Defense Department's own Law of War Manual, which explicitly forbids declaring no quarter will be given. International Crisis Group senior adviser Brian Finucane, a former U.S. government war crimes lawyer, stated that even declaring no quarter constitutes a war crime punishable by up to life imprisonment under the DoD Manual for Military Commissions.

Stanford law professor Tom Dannenbaum confirmed declaring no quarter is prohibited under international humanitarian law and itself amounts to a war crime.

pattyloutwo

(538 posts)

14. He's such a leader!

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 06:28 PM

5 hrs ago

Please keep talking, Senator Khanna!

LetMyPeopleVote

(178,969 posts)

15. MS NOW- The dangerous significance of Pete Hegseth's 'no quarter' Iran war pledge

Reply to Miles Archer (Original post)

Sun Mar 15, 2026, 06:31 PM

5 hrs ago

The defense secretary’s disdain for rules of engagement and the laws of war is apparent. And it could lead to war crimes — by Americans and against Americans.

The dangerous significance of Pete Hegsethâ€™s â€˜no quarterâ€™ Iran war pledge -
The defense secretaryâ€™s disdain for rules of engagement and the laws of war is apparent. And it could lead to war crimes â€” by Americans and against Americans.

www.ms.now/opinion/hegs...
— Susan Cooper aka Buzzedition (@buzzedition.bsky.social) 2026-03-15T03:45:22.636Z

https://www.ms.now/opinion/hegseth-war-crimes-iran-no-quarter

It’s no secret that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth doesn’t care much for the laws of war. In the opening days of the war against Iran, he proudly said the ongoing assault involved “no stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars.” Standing before the press Friday morning, Hegseth again promised “no quarter, no mercy for our enemies.” .....

As MS NOW’s Julia Jester rightly noted, Friday’s comments from Hegseth calling for “no quarter” stand out for even more implicitly greenlighting the military to violate the broader laws of war as well as the military’s own longstanding rules of engagement:

Orders or threats of “no quarter” — a term used for killing enemies who surrender or are rendered unable to fight — have been considered violations of international law since the Hague Convention of 1899, with “directions to give no quarter” listed as a war crime following World War II. […]

And it’s not just global rules that are being flouted. Not only does the term no quarter violate the Geneva Convention, it defies the U.S. Marine Corps’ own rules of engagement: “Do not engage anyone who has surrendered or is out of battle due to sickness or wounds.”

.....That seems unlikely given a new effort from Hegseth to undertake a “ruthless overhaul” of the military’s judge advocate general corps and their fellow civilian lawyers at the Pentagon. As The Atlantic reported, the concern with this review is that it provides cover for an attempt to “reduce the ranks of lawyers, purge internal dissent, and eliminate guardrails designed to restrict the military from carrying out legally dubious orders.” And while operations like the sinking of an Iranian warship returning from a multinational training exercise are technically allowed under the laws of war, it’s hard to say they were fully legal under American law, given the administration’s lack of a clear legal rationale for the war effort.

Despite what Hegseth may think, words matter in times of war. Beyond conveying the message of what is gained through fighting, it is only through clear communication that the orders from the top can be carried out by the servicemembers who’ve sworn an oath to obey them. His refusal to acknowledge that there are times where things other than body count should factor into combat decisions threatens the cohesion and professionalism of the military.

Likewise, it’s the global commitment to the established laws of war that keeps American civilians safe and untargeted. In rejecting them with his statements, he is incentivizing those who serve under his command to not only discard their humanity but destroy a shield protecting their fellow Americans from having the same standard of “maximum lethality” carried out against them.

Reply to this discussion