Search results

Uh huh... Bullshit. Someone asked you what they're replacing them with. You said "They're not." The article litterally says they are. IDGAF what you said before, your answer here was either blatantly wrong or a blatant lie.

Funnily enough, literally the very first article to come up when I searched it says they'll be doing rotations of other fighters to replace them short term, with the long term not yet decided. But then, you're remarkably good at missing things that don't fit your internal narrative...

More like the French government telling the British not to sink their ships. EDIT; Or, before that, the Danish government telling the British not to sink their ships.... Bit of a history of Britain sinking other peoples ships so they couldn't end up in the wrong hands.

I mean... ALL politicians try to present the best possible face, or interpretation, basically unanimously to the point of lying. That's pretty much what politics is entirely about. Which isn't good of course, but is kinda inevitable when you entrust supreme executive authority to a popularity...

And Republicans certainly never try to play the PR game with their overseas adventures.

TL;DR - @History Learner is a moron, and continues to blur the lines between creative interpretation to suit his own needs, and being so blinkered by his beliefs that his brain can basically rewrite reality on the fly to support his conclusions. Is he lying? Is he lying to himself? Is he just...