Ma'am?

"the buck stops here"

what

What country do you live in?

Canada

I'm confused

Up late lol

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/11/13/trumps_updated_isis_plan_bomb_the_shit_out_of_them_send_exxon_in_to_rebuild.html

yea I work nights

Ah

```U.S. president Harry S. Truman had a sign on his desk with 'The buck stops here' inscribed on it.

This was meant to indicate that he didn't 'pass the buck' to anyone else but accepted personal responsibility for the way the country was governed.
```

@C1PHER morally, I disagree with that. Every man is responsible for his actions

And only his

does this go for all presidents? Also if an employee does something that kills someone is the company not liable? I might be wrong. But if a engine check happens for example and the shitty engineer or mechanic misses something on a plane then it crashes the people who put the mechanic there are liable

Depends on the company and the contract the employee signed upon hiring

also government is for the people by the people too

LLC are not responsible for individuals' actions

Or vice versa

Idr

Lol

It's nothing official, but it's meant to suggest that the president bears the ultimate responsibility for actions by the government under his watch

we can pick this up this weekend sometime (my bdays is tomorrow so maybe ill do some drunk debates with some of you)

Happy birthday!! Get drunk! Have fun!

<:pepohype:562563640990105600>

<a:happy:535725762825814016>

Gn

@C1PHER understandable for someone in his position and power but I still disagree

For all of Alloy’s complaining about good faith arguments and he puts this up? Seriously? Does he seriously believe that the outcomes would be any better if known war hawk Hillary was elected? Whenever someone unironically uses ‘whataboutism’ in a debate it just means that they don’t want to account for the holes in their argument. He’s trying to argue that the democrats is inherently more peaceful than republicans and he will deliberately ignore any criticism of that point.

There is no credibility to his argument. End of discussion.

If you want the wars in the Middle East to end, you have to convince your representatives and the overall constituency of that representative to support that.

It’s not easy, but it’s the only reliable method

Go find some reasonable anti-war lobbying group and volunteer with them.

If one doesn’t exist - start it.

Pure and simple.

Initially the core of his argument was all trump voters are reaponiblenfor trumps actions. Which is philosophically stupid and morally wrong. But he didnt address my moral argument so whatevs

He’s not going to address it.

Plus he doesn’t believe morals are a thing, so it makes any criticism he uses arbitrary

This guy is actively trying to manipulate us into believing his nonsense and he’s doing a poor job of it.

" gotta trigger them conservitards so trolly I'm soooooo funnneee love me daddy that I never met"

Just look at how ridiculous the first part of his argument was. He was basically trying to justify political violence and now he’s upset that wars happen.

Violence can be justified. It'll be JUST AS IF I punched you in the naziface