ithuriel Posted 12 October 2017 Share Posted 12 October 2017 A bit old but still funny Trump and is entourage are certainly going to be comedic material for years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 12 October 2017 Share Posted 12 October 2017 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41598991 Sigh. How Reaganesque. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 (edited) On 8 October 2017 at 21:08, Webbo said: Threatening genocide? Have you got an example of this tweet? https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/911789314169823232 Come on, Koreans see it as a declaration of war, in context it's a clear threat of nuclear war. Guy is an absolute psychopath, and now about to become the first sitting president to speak at a hate groups annual summit. How can people seriously defend him? Edited 13 October 2017 by The Doctor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 4 minutes ago, The Doctor said: https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/911789314169823232 Come on, Koreans see it as a declaration of war, in context it's a clear threat of nuclear war. Guy is an absolute psychopath, and now about to become the first sitting president to speak at a hate groups annual summit. How can people seriously defend him? Anyone with any empathy for Donald Trump just isn't a good human being tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 3 minutes ago, The Doctor said: https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/911789314169823232 Come on, Koreans see it as a declaration of war, in context it's a clear threat of nuclear war. Guy is an absolute psychopath, and now about to become the first sitting president to speak at a hate groups annual summit. How can people seriously defend him? genocide ˈdʒɛnəsʌɪd/ noun the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group. Now I'm pretty sure he's not threatening to kill all Koreans. NK has repeatedly threatened to nuke America and now possibly has the means and yet because Trump threatens to retaliate he's the bad guy?Dislike Trump all you like but ffs lets have some perspective here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 1 minute ago, lifted*fox said: Anyone with any empathy for Donald Trump just isn't a good human being tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 Just now, Webbo said: bwaha, you're too easy webbo. far too easy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 Wow, I've been schooled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 32 minutes ago, Webbo said: genocide ˈdʒɛnəsʌɪd/ noun the deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular nation or ethnic group. Now I'm pretty sure he's not threatening to kill all Koreans. NK has repeatedly threatened to nuke America and now possibly has the means and yet because Trump threatens to retaliate he's the bad guy?Dislike Trump all you like but ffs lets have some perspective here. Because nuclear warheads discriminate somehow? Cutting edge development I'd missed. NK doesn't have the means to destroy America, and the guy absolutely should not be responding with threats of wiping a nation off the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 31 minutes ago, The Doctor said: Because nuclear warheads discriminate somehow? Cutting edge development I'd missed. NK doesn't have the means to destroy America, and the guy absolutely should not be responding with threats of wiping a nation off the map. America doesn't need nukes to defeat Kim Un Jong. You don't seriously believe he's going to nuke them anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 Just now, Webbo said: America doesn't need nukes to defeat Kim Un Jong. You don't seriously believe he's going to nuke them anyway. Nah, the dunning-Kruger effect personified, who's previously asked why he can't just use them? He is the sort who would actually deploy them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 2 minutes ago, Webbo said: America doesn't need nukes to defeat Kim Un Jong. You don't seriously believe he's going to nuke them anyway. Certainly they don't, conventional means would definitely suffice...but as the Doc says above the bellicose rhetoric with (and this is important) the firepower to legitimately destroy a country to back it up (something the NKs don't have) doesn't exactly help. And also as said above...it's not like setting off even a conventional war would be good for any Koreans North or South, would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 27 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Certainly they don't, conventional means would definitely suffice...but as the Doc says above the bellicose rhetoric with (and this is important) the firepower to legitimately destroy a country to back it up (something the NKs don't have) doesn't exactly help. And also as said above...it's not like setting off even a conventional war would be good for any Koreans North or South, would it? It's not genocide though. I might have a bit more respect for some of these arguments if it wasn't for the hysterical hyperbole. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 6 minutes ago, Webbo said: It's not genocide though. I might have a bit more respect for some of these arguments if it wasn't for the hysterical hyperbole. The guy has talked about nuclear annihilation as casually as you might discuss plans for the weekend - and nuking North Korea, with the inevitable fall out, would amount to genocide given he'd wipe a country off the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Webbo said: It's not genocide though. I might have a bit more respect for some of these arguments if it wasn't for the hysterical hyperbole. Well, more accurate would indeed be "threatening a course of action that intentionally or no would result in large scale death approaching genocidal levels within the Korean population", but that doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. In any case, it's the environmental stuff that his administration is pushing that has the potential for real trouble on that score IMO. Changing the subject somewhat, Trump is addressing the Values Voter Summit today. Here's a little slice of their swag bag giveaways: https://images-ext-2.discordapp.net/external/jcy3jpqNxQI-hWNEXoESFhXOknfmoJi4GVPlJApNMiw/https/pbs.twimg.com/media/DMBdohRUEAAzsxV.jpg%3Alarge Edited 13 October 2017 by leicsmac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellend Sebastian Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 Personally I'm fed up of all these so called experts saying that nuclear war is a bad thing and everybody dies. After Hiroshima, some people, even with terrible radiation burns over their entire bodies, lived for days afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 23 minutes ago, The Doctor said: The guy has talked about nuclear annihilation as casually as you might discuss plans for the weekend - and nuking North Korea, with the inevitable fall out, would amount to genocide given he'd wipe a country off the map. One nuke would wipe Korea off the map? Are you sure about that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 20 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said: Personally I'm fed up of all these so called experts saying that nuclear war is a bad thing and everybody dies. After Hiroshima, some people, even with terrible radiation burns over their entire bodies, lived for days afterwards https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltpEZcPpgoM This man knew his stuff. 4 minutes ago, Webbo said: One nuke would wipe Korea off the map? Are you sure about that? I'm pretty sure more than one would be used. And a few in the right place coupled with the knock-on effects of famine resulting from it would likely result in a death toll approaching genocidal proportions, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 More on the VVS: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/355096-trump-to-become-first-sitting-president-to-address-values-voter I'd be interested in hearing the take on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 Just now, leicsmac said: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltpEZcPpgoM This man knew his stuff. I'm pretty sure more than one would be used. And a few in the right place coupled with the knock-on effects of famine resulting from it would likely result in a death toll approaching genocidal proportions, yes. Why would more than one be used, if any were used at all . It's an academic question because I don't think you genuinely believe it'll happen. Lastly why is Trump getting all the blame when NK is clearly the aggressor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 13 October 2017 Share Posted 13 October 2017 8 minutes ago, Webbo said: Why would more than one be used, if any were used at all . It's an academic question because I don't think you genuinely believe it'll happen. Lastly why is Trump getting all the blame when NK is clearly the aggressor? Yeah, I don't think they'll be used, as you don't either I'm guessing so the question is academic; as we both agree on, the US is more than capable of doing the job conventionally. But if they were used, I'm guessing they would use individual ones to at least target possible launch sites, and (perhaps) cities, should the need arise. I think that question has been covered before, but Trump is getting the blame because unlike the NK's he actually has the firepower to back up his threats. Were he of the inclination, he could indeed wipe NK off the map with a single order and the reading of a single code from a card in his pocket. That's the thing all along, really - the NK threats, annoying as they are, are totally hollow - the little kid saying that he'll beat up the biggest kid in his class when everyone knows he'll get a kicking from here to Sunday. The ones coming from the US...are not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 14 October 2017 Share Posted 14 October 2017 (edited) Edited 14 October 2017 by lifted*fox 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trav Le Bleu Posted 15 October 2017 Share Posted 15 October 2017 Gold... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionator Posted 15 October 2017 Share Posted 15 October 2017 The hypocrite complains that past presidents haven't dealt with North Korea harshly enough on their nuclear programme and yet wants to withdraw the Iran deal which basically prevents the Iranian regime from buidling nuclear weapons. It makes no sense. Iran out of all of the countries in the world seem to be the only ones who actually want to politically move into the modern era and this fool puts it all in jeapordy. Please impeach him GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dames Posted 15 October 2017 Share Posted 15 October 2017 On 13/10/2017 at 21:20, Webbo said: Why would more than one be used, if any were used at all . It's an academic question because I don't think you genuinely believe it'll happen. Lastly why is Trump getting all the blame when NK is clearly the aggressor? This is what I don’t get. NK has been acting aggresively for a long time now yet some how they are still the victim because it needs to fit a certain narrative to portray Trump in the worst way possible. Trump isn’t and never will be the greatest President or Person but the narrative against him blows every thing out of proportion and there is very little perspective or balanced views. Also Hillary Clinton would have said and done very similar things if the roles were reversed and she’d probably be portrayed as brave and courageous for not being ‘bullied’. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts