By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump: Let it be a arms race

Qwark on 23 December 2016
Hiku said:
"I won't take it (nuking Europe) off the table."

R.I.P. Europe.

Burn in hell US soon after since not any of the superpowers will accept such a thing. China, Russia and South America will bomb the shit out of US to.prevent the end of the world hopefully and rightfully so if US decides to nuke Europe.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Around the Network
Soundwave on 23 December 2016



Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
Good. Lunatics need to know that they'll easily be bombed to death if they try anything funny. They need to be addressed in a language they understand.

Which lunatics? Who is there even left to have an arms race with? ISIS drive around in used Toyota Trucks and many on freaking horseback, they don't even have a fleet of tanks let alone an air force, let alone a navy, let alone a nuclear aresenal, Ethiopia has a larger standing army. 



bunchanumbers on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
Good. Lunatics need to know that they'll easily be bombed to death if they try anything funny. They need to be addressed in a language they understand.

You realize that he would be going beyond police state into global domination? He would be going far beyond if he does this. And it would lead to situations like Aleppo. Thousands upon thousands dead to get rid of some lunatics.



Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

Which lunatics? Who is there even left to have an arms race with? ISIS drive around in used Toyota Trucks and many on freaking horseback, they don't even have a fleet of tanks let alone an air force, let alone a navy, let alone a nuclear aresenal, Ethiopia has a larger standing army. 

Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and others who may toy around with the development of nuclear weapons. Nobody fears or even respects a USA that has a mentality of "please don't do this."

And of those 4, the US already has more nuclear weapons than all four combined and could blow the world up a thousand times over. 

And the only way there can be an "arms race" is if you purposely incite Russia or China to engage in an arms race (a race isn't much of a race when there's no one else running). 

But sure, lets cut taxes on the mega-rich while increasing military spending for no reason. Not like that money needs to be used elsewhere. 

It's like this guy:

Thinking he needs to spend even more of his monthly budget on steroids and supplements, when he already spends 1/3 of paycheque every month on that (while racking up tons of credit card debt), because he's scared this dude at the gym:

Might be catching up to him. 



Around the Network
Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

And of those 4, the US already has more nuclear weapons than all four combined and could blow the world up a thousand times over. 

And the only way there can be an "arms race" is if you purposely incite Russia or China to engage in an arms race (a race isn't much of a race when there's no one else running). 

But sure, lets cut taxes on the mega-rich while increasing military spending for no reason. Not like that money needs to be used elsewhere. 

As if Trump would really need to do this. It's about the message that it is futile to try to beat the USA, therefore it's not even worth trying.

The industrial military complex in the US gets its money no matter what anyway. Of course I'm sure they wouldn't mind even more though and this is likely music to their ears. 



Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
SpokenTruth said:

There is not a country on Earth that doesn't already know that.  I mean if we're talking real wars and not the money/politics/power grab wars we've had for the past who knows how long.

Obama was a wuss, so this issue demanded reinforcement.

Would you volunteer to go fight in Syria on the front lines? I doubt it, does that make you a "wuss"?

Chickenhawks talk a big game until it comes to actually doing the fighting of the war, for that it's always someone else who should send their sons or daughters to fight. 



Soundwave on 23 December 2016

For there to be an actual "arms race" the US needs to covertly antagonize a state to engage with them in an arms race.

And from the way Trump is talking, that lines up an awful lot with China. 



Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
SpokenTruth said:

A wuss with a military budget equal to the next 30 countries combined.  But again, we're talking a real war versus these piddly little feel goods that get dragged out for years for no reason other than money/oil.

Look, the point is that nobody is afraid of Obama. But Trump, on the other hand, has people freaking out easily. There is a sense of Trump being more than a "talking the talk" guy like Obama was.

I'm sure Osama bin Laden thought Obama was a wuss right up until that bullet went straight through his cranium. 

Truth is the military complex in the US largely operates on its own, anyway. The president's job is actually to restrain it from doing something stupid, like say invading Iraq or having a land invasion of Cuba when there are nuclear weapons on the island or not understanding that Vietnemese didn't care how many bombs and Agent Orange you dropped on them, they didn't give one fuck, they would fight to the last man/woman/child. 

A president who doesn't have that nuance or intelligence in his arsenal is just going to be led around by his military generals like a puppet on a string. 



Soundwave on 23 December 2016
RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

I'm sure Osama bin Laden thought Obama was a wuss right up until that bullet went straight through his cranium. 

Truth is the military complex in the US largely operates on its own, anyway. The president's job is actually to restrain it from doing something stupid, like say invading Iraq or having a land invasion of Cuba when there are nuclear weapons on the island or not understanding that Vietnemese didn't care how many bombs and Agent Orange you dropped on them, they didn't give one fuck, they would fight to the last man/woman/child. 

A president who doesn't have that nuance or intelligence in his arsenal is just going to be led around by his military generals like a puppet on a string. 

Bin Laden got a bounty on his head during the Bush administration.

SpokenTruth said:

Oh, they are afraid of Trump alright.   But they are already that regardless of any nuclear arsenal expansions. 

One must ponder what exactly can 10,000 nuclear warheads do that our current 7,000+ cannot?  How much of a difference that does that make on the fears of our enemies (and allies who will become enemies on a Trump whim)?

It's not about the tally of nuclear weapons, it's about the USA being taken seriously again. People just laugh at Obama for such things as what happened a few days ago where he signed a bill or something about religious freedom for atheists worldwide.

Yeah and the Bush adminstration failed to find him for seven years, instead running off to Iraq and killing a leader that had nothing to do with 9/11. 

JFK's generals thought the Russian's were "laughing" at the US for not invading Cuba ... truth is JFK likely saved the world from World War III. 

IMO, if Trump was president, in a situation like that, it would have turned out to be a disaster. He is going to be led around like a dope by military generals who know all you have to do is stroke his ego a bit and challenge his manhood to manipulate him into going along with anything. 

That is not a good leader.