Its not about imminent threat. The “stated” purpose of the strike was to prevent the use of the materials at the site in a bomb. (Nevermind that our own intelligence people said they were still years away originally). But under that goal, cargo trucks could move material to many different locations and make it nearly impossible to keep track of. While there is a lot of BS in there. It’s an argument that can be made.
I’m not saying he did. I am saying it can be argued endlessly in all directions. Which counters the “clearly” impeachable part. And really, he has done much less gray things he could be impeached on. This isn’t going to be the one that makes it happen.
To skip congress, all they need is “something” they can use to say it is urgent. And they do have satellite activity showing a bunch of cargo trucks or what not. So they can hang thier hat on that and say it couldn’t wait. That would make it pretty hard to impeach on frankly. So this call is just political theater.
Now as for should we have done it… well I can at least see both sides. Iran has been defiant in it’s continued operation of it nuclear program. And all the “talks” haven’t really done much. The bombing likely does slow them down at least. Of course the other side to that questions what right does the US have to say other countries can research nuclear anything.
So there really everything about this is in the gray area where logical arguments could be made and debated endlessly about.
Pushing it to that point is the most likely way to get the military to fracture. Which is the only realistic way to win this by force. Not saying force is the only way, but if it is the way, you need to force a split.
Seeing as how donactions are only a deduction from your taxable income, 10k won’t get you to not paying taxes unless you make like 20 or 30k or something. And I gotta think thier system will flag that, probably just assuming it was a typo.
But billionaire are supposed to pay nothing. That’s intentional. Lol.
Hm. Checking my glasses I think there is something on the top too. I can see distance ever so slightly clearer looking out the top. If I remember right, I have a minus .25 in one eye. Always been told it didn’t need correction, but maybe it is in this pair. I should go get some off the shelf progressive readers and try those.
Yeah, my wife got me something that claimed to auto focus. Was just a pair of progressive readers.
I can go buy readers when I don’t need them. I’ve been told that using a higher power than you need is bad for you as well. And you can buy glasses online with no script. So I don’t think that reason would be valid.
I hope you are right. But I don’t have a perscription. So I would need clear by default, and only autofocusing for reading. I shouldn’t need a script for that.
When I play a board game and need to read the cards I need glasses. But if I want to look at the player across the table I have to take them off. Squinting doesn’t seem to help.
Is that the same as Progressives? I have them. I hate the areas that don’t work on the sides. People get used to them I guess, but I don’t have to wear mine most of the time. And even if you are used to it, that means you have some distorted peripheral vision when you wear them.
I thought you got at least 2 years…
Sure, but I shouldn’t have to. Seems like more of a reason that requiring perscriptions isn’t really about anything but money.
Can’t you buy colored contacts with no correction? Seems like if you can do that, the issue with your ryes being unsuitable isn’t the reason.
Well, I have tried multiple sets of reading glasses at different magnification. They all work fine. So I don’t think it needs to be that exact to match the person. And I would think some sort of calibration, either by manual means or plugging them into a smartphone and using an app should cover that. I doubt it corrects for things like astigmatism that are more complex.
And prescriptions for glasses in general bug me. The only argument for requiring them and having them expire I have heard is that the wrong perscription could be dangerous while driving and such. But heck, we don’t make you retake the drivers test every 2 years, and people’s driving skills certainly decrease with age. So why prescriptions? Seems like another one of those good for business and not for people laws.
You give them too much credit. I am sure plenty just voted for it to own the libs without any idea what was in it. Others probably only knew what fox news told them.
Some women are strongly attracted to confidence. Some to famous people and/or money. Not the majority. But it would only take 1% to easily explain his success. He has the oportunity to meet a lot more women than most of us. And I doubt he let’s too many opportunities pass him by.
When you are talking about a survey, the “how far” is specific to each person. So it is a bad question. But no matter how Donny interprets it, the answer to the “have they gone too far” tells you Donnys interpretation is too far for the majority.