Quantcast
President Trump Threatens to "Totally Destroy" North Korea.

Forums - Politics Discussion - President Trump Threatens to "Totally Destroy" North Korea.

cmay227 said:
o_O.Q said:

it saddens me that you actually believe that bullshit when you have evidence of the contrary...

 

so... uh is a better alternative to drop a bomb on your neighbours house and kill them both in other to help the abuse victim? that sounds stupid right? well what has the us been doing for the past decade?

 

where are the weapons of mass destruction? lol

So all your referring to is the Iraq war. I forgot what a great leader saddam was to his people and the world.  The U.S. attacked a great and wonderful man. So you don't give 2 shits what happens to other people as long as it doesn't effect you?  And to blame terrorist on America is just plain dumb. Sorry to inform you but people like that have been around a lot longer then the U.S. has. It's not like Iraq ever invaded Kuwait or killed their people or hated their leader to the point of hanging him.

first off the us put saddam in power 

 

and i use iraq because that's the most obvious example where millions of people died (which you seem to think isn't a big deal i guess)

 

"And to blame terrorist on America is just plain dumb."

 

well not if you fund them, arm them and train them

 



Around the Network

The only message this sends to "Rocket Man" is that the nuclear program of NK must be accelerated and given more importance.



Machiavellian said:
Personally, I have nothing wrong with the one statement that we will retaliate with everything we got if NK decides to escalate things any further. This point I totally agree with Trump. My problem as always with Trump is that when speaking to groups of nations he has to use stupid belittling language like Rocket Man, we really do not need the grade school name calling. It makes him look simple when presenting something very serious and dangerous when he resort to that type of language.

You know that probably one of the reasons he got ellect is because he talks without subterfuge or using difficult words to mean the same? It is very idiotic when two politicians do namecalling and personal attacks using words of false respect.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

o_O.Q said:
Superman4 said:

Yeah, thats a bullshit statement. Yes we are the only ones to use one against someone, that is the reason the world understands that it isnt a viable option anymore. Yes the US is involved in a lot of things I dont feel we should be but we dont start conflicts. When we are attacked we attack back, sometimes at more than we should.

"Yes the US is involved in a lot of things I dont feel we should be but we dont start conflicts."

 

if the us doesn't start conflicts ( bullshit ) how do you get involved in things you shouldn't be involved in?

 

what happened with iraq? or lybia? or syria? how was the united states attacked first in any of those wars?

We didnt start the Iraq war, we didnt start the Afghanistan war etc. Lybia, Syria, Iraq etc. were all fighting their own battles and murdering people by the thousands. We picked a side. When we were attacked twice at the World Trade Center site we decided to fight back. I dont feel that we need to be involved in a lot of what we are, I dont think that we need to have bases all around the world or supply countries with weapons. We are also not the only ones doing so. N Korea poses a threat to everyone, not just the US. It has already commited an act of war by firing two missles at Japan, how do we know they meant to miss? 



Superman4 said:
o_O.Q said:

"Yes the US is involved in a lot of things I dont feel we should be but we dont start conflicts."

 

if the us doesn't start conflicts ( bullshit ) how do you get involved in things you shouldn't be involved in?

 

what happened with iraq? or lybia? or syria? how was the united states attacked first in any of those wars?

We didnt start the Iraq war, we didnt start the Afghanistan war etc. Lybia, Syria, Iraq etc. were all fighting their own battles and murdering people by the thousands. We picked a side. When we were attacked twice at the World Trade Center site we decided to fight back. I dont feel that we need to be involved in a lot of what we are, I dont think that we need to have bases all around the world or supply countries with weapons. We are also not the only ones doing so. N Korea poses a threat to everyone, not just the US. It has already commited an act of war by firing two missles at Japan, how do we know they meant to miss? 

So how did the united states get involved in the wars in iraq, lybia and syria? are you saying those countries were responsible for the world trade attacks?

 

". N Korea poses a threat to everyone, not just the US. It has already commited an act of war by firing two missles at Japan, how do we know they meant to miss? "

 

the united states for the past few decades fired and hit targets in the countries i mentioned above among others... following your logic the united states is a far bigger threat to  any country in the world than north korea right?

 

oh and another thing, the united states is currently involved in a war in syria right? 

 

so if north korea comes along and attacks the u s then that's ok according to your logic right?



Around the Network
o_O.Q said:
cmay227 said:

If your neighbor beats his wife and kids every night and you know it's happening, do you just sit back and turn a blind eye? The US and the UN as a whole. feels it has a obligation to help defend those who can't defend themselves from power hungry leaders of other shitty countries who rule by oppression and fear. You can be the guy who watches your neighbor eventually kill his family or his family kill him. Or try to intervene and remove the issue from the situation. By any means necessary with a attack being the last resort. The US as a country has give more money to other countries as well as aid in many forms,then it does in its own backyard. 

it saddens me that you actually believe that bullshit when you have evidence of the contrary...

 

so... uh is a better alternative to drop a bomb on your neighbours house and kill them both in other to help the abuse victim? that sounds stupid right? well what has the us been doing for the past decade?

 

where are the weapons of mass destruction? lol

 So, it's your position that Saddam Hussein was not a brutal mass murderer who should have been ousted from power?  

"Iraq, today, 10 years on from the war, from the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, is not what the Iraqi people hoped for and expected. We hoped for an inclusive democracy, an Iraq that is at peace with itself and at peace with its neighbors," Salih said. "To be blunt, we are far from that."

"But," he added, "it's important to understand where we started from. ... Literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were sent to mass graves. Ten years on from the demise of Saddam Hussein, we're still discovering mass graves across Iraq. And Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein—the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein."  - 2013 Barham Salih, the former prime minister of Iraqi Kurdistan's regional government and a former deputy prime minister of Iraq's federal government. 



Mandalore76 said:
o_O.Q said:

it saddens me that you actually believe that bullshit when you have evidence of the contrary...

 

so... uh is a better alternative to drop a bomb on your neighbours house and kill them both in other to help the abuse victim? that sounds stupid right? well what has the us been doing for the past decade?

 

where are the weapons of mass destruction? lol

 So, it's your position that Saddam Hussein was not a brutal mass murderer who should have been ousted from power?  

"Iraq, today, 10 years on from the war, from the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, is not what the Iraqi people hoped for and expected. We hoped for an inclusive democracy, an Iraq that is at peace with itself and at peace with its neighbors," Salih said. "To be blunt, we are far from that."

"But," he added, "it's important to understand where we started from. ... Literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were sent to mass graves. Ten years on from the demise of Saddam Hussein, we're still discovering mass graves across Iraq. And Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein—the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein."  - 2013 Barham Salih, the former prime minister of Iraqi Kurdistan's regional government and a former deputy prime minister of Iraq's federal government.  

the united states from what i remember last reading, caused the deaths of about 2 million civilian people in iraq... now i could be way off on that, but i remember reading that somewhere

secondly as i said, saddam was put in power with the support of the united states

thirdly since they lied about the initial motivation for attacking iraq why would i trust what they say about what he was like as a leader?

 

finally i've also read elsewhere that the true reason for the war in iraq was because saddam was orienting their financial system to be less dependent on and supportive of the united states financial system, which also was the case in lybia

 

you can dismiss without bothering to investigate it yourself and just go to trusting the people that lied to you about weapons of mass destruction blindly if you want, its your choice



o_O.Q said:
Superman4 said:

We didnt start the Iraq war, we didnt start the Afghanistan war etc. Lybia, Syria, Iraq etc. were all fighting their own battles and murdering people by the thousands. We picked a side. When we were attacked twice at the World Trade Center site we decided to fight back. I dont feel that we need to be involved in a lot of what we are, I dont think that we need to have bases all around the world or supply countries with weapons. We are also not the only ones doing so. N Korea poses a threat to everyone, not just the US. It has already commited an act of war by firing two missles at Japan, how do we know they meant to miss? 

So how did the united states get involved in the wars in iraq, lybia and syria? are you saying those countries were responsible for the world trade attacks?

 

". N Korea poses a threat to everyone, not just the US. It has already commited an act of war by firing two missles at Japan, how do we know they meant to miss? "

 

the united states for the past few decades fired and hit targets in the countries i mentioned above among others... following your logic the united states is a far bigger threat to  any country in the world than north korea right?

 

oh and another thing, the united states is currently involved in a war in syria right? 

 

so if north korea comes along and attacks the u s then that's ok according to your logic right?

Yes USA is a greater threat, to a extent that no one bothers to go against and that even go over ONU demands to not intervene, so? Still have been several decades since USA hold war against a democratic country.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

o_O.Q said:
cmay227 said:

So all your referring to is the Iraq war. I forgot what a great leader saddam was to his people and the world.  The U.S. attacked a great and wonderful man. So you don't give 2 shits what happens to other people as long as it doesn't effect you?  And to blame terrorist on America is just plain dumb. Sorry to inform you but people like that have been around a lot longer then the U.S. has. It's not like Iraq ever invaded Kuwait or killed their people or hated their leader to the point of hanging him.

first off the us put saddam in power 

 

and i use iraq because that's the most obvious example where millions of people died (which you seem to think isn't a big deal i guess)

 

"And to blame terrorist on America is just plain dumb."

 

well not if you fund them, arm them and train them

 

Millions is a greatly overstated number.  Maybe 500,000 deaths over the last decade. The desicion to arm what you call terrorist is before so called people were considered terrorist. That's just reaching. You'd rather let's hundreds of thousands of people die untill you took action. If a person walks into a mall with a ar15 do you wait till they kill 2, 3 , 10 , 20 people before you say. Oh shit this guy is bad news let's take him out. Or do you take him out before he has a chance to kill? Especially if there is a history of killing by this person.  How many have to die before you can justify attacking someone?  Give me a number.



Birimbau said:
I hope the petrodollar to end, this BS is what makes US to be a bully. Hopefully China will put their plan to dump dollars and make trade using gold backed contracts as they are planning.

I heard about that...China is the world´s largest oil importer and they´re preparing to bypass the U.S. dollar with gold-backed yuan.That´s a complete game changer.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-02/de-dollarization-accelerates-china-readies-yuan-priced-crude-oil-benchmark-backed-go