No, fuck that! We spent twenty years nation building there and the first time they needed to stand up on their own the ANA folded up and ran.

They weren’t willing to do the bare minimum to avoid Taliban rule. It’s not our fault they were too stupid to see the consequences when they rolled over and let the fucking cavemen take over.

Mr. Calhoun?

No, lung infection.

Died after two weeks in the ICU fighting pneumonia and MRSA.

A lot of you’re an edgy teenager on the internet.

Nothing if you’re a well adjusted adult.

For real. It’s like a living version of the principal Skinner meme.

“Multiple people are bringing cohesive arguments against my viewpoint? They must be sick puppets.”

Dude, what the actual fuck is your malfunction?

Yes, wanting factual, unbiased journalism truly is the greatest form of simping.

You clearly didn’t read the tail end of my original comment. Fabricated grievances dilute genuine ones. This publication is crying wolf. This makes people pay less attention when news breaks about an actual fuckup.

All of this is at best tangential.

The NSA broke no law. The article’s headline implies that the NSA broke the law. This headline is misleading.

Sure, but ex post facto is a thing. If people feel that this should be illegal they should write their representatives, but this headline is disingenuous.

Actions are only illegal if they were against the law at the time they were taken. If fireworks become illegal on July 5th I can’t be found guilty for shooting them off on July 4th.

The headline implies the NSA broke a law that does not exist, actively misleading those who read it. Shame on the “journalist” or editor that wrote it. Fabricated criticisms and grievances dilute genuine ones.