Progressive Democrats Succeed in Removing $1 Billion Iron Dome Funding From Bill

[Beastly Boy]

146. You keep making stuff up and declaring it to be true.

Do your sources exist anywhere outside your imagination? If they do, cite them, and if you don't, you can't expect to be taken seriously. Plainly, you keep proving the latter to be the case. Example: you failed to cite the document you referred to by name, and when I spoon fed it to you, and even included the exact copy of the annex titled exactly as you typed it, which is a letter that has the legal authority of a grocery shopping list, you are telling me that the document you clearly referred to and I found is the wrong document, without as much as hinting at the existence of the imaginary "right" document that someone supposedly adopted and signed??? Seriously, how lame can your excuses get? And, since you are such a glutton for punishment, here is the link to Article 51 of the UN Charter: https://legal.un.org/repertory/art51.shtml Find me the part that defines "military agression". Again, I am not interested in your definition, it is Article 51 you are referring to, so get to work or be laughed at... Oh wait, I know, wrong document, right? Pathetic! Ok, I've got another one for you: do your own research, right? Now, that's much better. Downright laughable!

And just for laughs and giggles, could you please impress me with YOUR comprehension of a strategic tactic that involves repeating the same old strategic tactic, only on a larger scale? I am especially interested in how a strategic deterrent that matches the increase in scale of same old strategic tactic raises in you suspicions of ineffectiveness.

I can't wait for your reply! Hopefully it will not involve references to oof... wrong strategic tactic! That would be too funny!