Come on, libturds. This is easy. Name a military operation thats been more successful than these 3. Put those outrageously stupid student loan dollars to work.
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2026 06:18 PM by UofMstateU.)
(05-05-2026 01:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: The 3 most successful military actions ever taken by the US have happened under Hegseth.
Name a single military action Austin did that was successful.
Quick, Someone call D-Day and let it know.
D-day was an unmitigated disaster. Learn history.
I would say you are brainwashed, but that would give you credit for possessing a brain.
Do they speak German in France? Nope, then D-Day was a success. Massive misdirection led by allied intelligence kept the Germans guessing, 160k troops put on the ground in a day to secure a foot hold to launch from, and they built temporary Mulberry harbors that 500,000 vehicles and 2.5M men used to land in France over the next 10 months.
(05-05-2026 01:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: The 3 most successful military actions ever taken by the US have happened under Hegseth.
Name a single military action Austin did that was successful.
Quick, Someone call D-Day and let it know.
D-day was an unmitigated disaster. Learn history.
I would say you are brainwashed, but that would give you credit for possessing a brain.
Do they speak German in France? Nope, then D-Day was a success. Massive misdirection led by allied intelligence kept the Germans guessing, 160k troops put on the ground in a day to secure a foot hold to launch from, and they built temporary Mulberry harbors that 500,000 vehicles and 2.5M men used to land in France over the next 10 months.
Well clearly, this excursion has been the most successful operation in history. Look what all it brought us.
High gas prices.
Iran with the same nuclear capacity they had before we started.
Allies alienated.
Leader of the free world status either weakened or ceded.
Increased oil sales for Iran.
Iranian "toll booths" on the Strait of Hormuz.
13 Americans dead and who knows how many wounded.
Thousands of dead, including innocent children.
30+ billion and climbing wasted.
Inflation on the rise.
Global economy on the brink.
Heckuva job, drunk pete!
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2026 06:03 AM by Redwingtom.)
Anyway, back to gas prices. It's going to get worse.
Quote:The American Petroleum Institute (API) estimated that crude oil inventories in the United States fell by 8.1 million barrels in the week ending May 1. In the week prior, US crude oil inventories fell by 1.79 million barrels. Analysts had expected a 2.8-million-barrel draw.
Inventories in the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) continue to draw down in an attempt to alleviate the pressure on prices. For week ending May 1, 5.2 million barrels left the SPR, bringing the new total to 392.7 million barrels—the lowest level since November 2024 and 332.8 million barrels shy of maximum capacity.
Gasoline inventories fell this week by 6.1 million barrels in the week ending May 1. In the week prior, gasoline inventories fell by 8.47 million barrels. As of last week, gasoline inventories were already 2% below the five-year average for this time of year, according to the latest EIA data.
Distillate inventories [Read Diesel] fell by 4.6 million barrels, after shedding 2.6 million barrels in the week prior. Distillate inventories were already 11% below the five-year average as of the week ending April 24, the latest EIA data shows.
Cushing inventory—the inventory kept at the delivery hub for the WTI Crude futures contract—fell by 1 million barrels, after sinking by 820,000 barrels in the week prior, with oilprice.com estimates that they are now below 29 million barrels.
(05-06-2026 06:39 AM)TripleA Wrote: Selling oil is a bad thing now? Unlike under Biden, we are now an oil exporter.
It is if you want to keep our gas prices lower. All those tankers coming here are going to raise what we pay at the pump.
And a little history lesson for you, driven by the shale oil boom, we lifted the ban on selling oil in 2015 under a bill signed into law by President Obama.
And we first sold more than we imported in September of 2019 before Biden was president and became a full yearly net exporter starting with 2020. Again, before Biden was president.
And from what I'm reading, total energy exports grew to record highs during the Biden presidency.
Side note, since D-Day was brought up. I am a big WW2 history nut. There is a new movie coming out that shows something few people know about. D-Day was almost canceled due to a massive storm that was possible
(05-06-2026 06:39 AM)TripleA Wrote: Selling oil is a bad thing now? Unlike under Biden, we are now an oil exporter.
If the United States owned all of our oil you'd be able to make a decent point here. We don't own the oil though, corporations do. Whatever gains come from the US being an oil exporter are first recognized the corporations that do own the oil. Any gains recognized by the US are secondary coming in the form of their stock price increasing and maybe them increasing employment and production if they determine increasing supply benefits their bottom line (they might not though they could just as easily say they profit more by not making the capital expenditures to increase supply and just keep driving overall prices higher).
If we as in the United States owned the oil, could make strategic decisions for the betterment of the country whether we ramp up or ramp down extraction and refinement depending on what would benefit the country and not profits, and sold it to our domestic population at one low price and exported to the world at a much higher price there would actually be a good argument (if you don't care at all about suffering of other people across the world) that blocking off the strait for a long time would be a big strategic win for the US. In that world our domestic population would be mostly insulated from gas and diesel price increases, and then we could ramp up production and greatly increase exports at ever increasing prices. This would make the country exponentially wealthier and cause greater and greater long term harm to China as we would have cut them off from one of their top sources of oil and could even potentially have them needing to import oil from us. However, that world doesn't exist. The domestic and multinational corporations that own our oil don't and quite frankly aren't supposed to care about making decisions that are in the best interests of the domestic and foreign policy goals of the United States. They only are supposed to care about what's in the best interest of increasing returns for their shareholders.
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2026 07:29 AM by b0ndsj0ns.)
Trump's actions (rather than the Dem's bribery and appeasement) to defang Iran are not the reason gas prices in California and other blue areas are higher than average.
(05-05-2026 01:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: The 3 most successful military actions ever taken by the US have happened under Hegseth.
Name a single military action Austin did that was successful.
Quick, Someone call D-Day and let it know.
D-day was an unmitigated disaster. Learn history.
I would say you are brainwashed, but that would give you credit for possessing a brain.
Do they speak German in France? Nope, then D-Day was a success. Massive misdirection led by allied intelligence kept the Germans guessing, 160k troops put on the ground in a day to secure a foot hold to launch from, and they built temporary Mulberry harbors that 500,000 vehicles and 2.5M men used to land in France over the next 10 months.
I voted for Trump and would again but I can't believe he had the gall to post that about Hegseth. It's absolutely ridiculous and disrespectful to some of our nation's history. Off the top of my head... D-day, Yorktown, Desert Storm, New Orleans, Vicksburg.
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2026 07:38 AM by b2b.)
