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

Forums - Politics - Daily Politics: Is Trump Pissing Off China Wise?

Qwark on 06 December 2016
JRPGfan said:
UnderstatedCornHole said:

I don't disagree with you.

If war is iminent with any super power then a first strike is always the only possible option at staying alive.

I'm not surw what is wrong with stating that as a universal fact. "Iminent" by definition means unavoidable.

Thats just crazy.

You know they built those silo's to be able to withstand a attack right?

So the missils fly reguardless of who strikes first or not, both parties get hit.

Just being first doesnt win you a war like that. Both sides lose, its the only outcome.



Also you dont know whats unavoidable or not, and the only thing you can know for certain,

is if you strike first, you ll get a strike back.

Depends on how hard you strike, the US can destroy every single square nanometer in China. As you said they can destroy the entire globe at least one time. A country can't fight back if there is nothing left to fight for or with. So yeah a superpower can actually win a war, that is if you consider a huge part of the world being unliveable a win. I personally don't concider it a win and there are more efficient ways to destroy your opponent from the inside. (For instant releasing a defirtilizing virus that is not transferable to breath but can be deployed as gas and  is transdermal and blame it on terrorist) still, the thread is averted. 

 



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Around the Network
Eagle367 on 07 December 2016
Qwark said:
Hillary Clinton and Obama where attacking Putin continue, which was supported for some reason. Trump wanting to restore or not attacking Russia was apparently wrong and frightening. But giving critique on China is also wrong. What China is doing in the south sea is not legal according to an international panel (Internationaal gerechtshof in Den Haag) neither dles the US. So make up your mind America do you want to criticize other countries or not. Because being upset at one and not another is confusing.

I actually support Trump in opposing these practices in China, since they are ruining industries and simetimes play dirty, like ditching steel in Europe and make producers there struggle. They also artificially keep prices for certain recources very high. Not because he is Donsld Trump, but because someone needs to criticize China once in a while.

Countries do these stuff all the time. the USA probably has done it and countries in Europe have also done it. But to your point about criticizing Russia, I feel like that is just to keep the public ignorant and happy. I can imagine them laughing about it in private cause some of the stuff is beyond stupid. Same thing with China as well. Beyond stupid



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Safiir on 07 December 2016
Qwark said:
JRPGfan said:

Thats just crazy.

You know they built those silo's to be able to withstand a attack right?

So the missils fly reguardless of who strikes first or not, both parties get hit.

Just being first doesnt win you a war like that. Both sides lose, its the only outcome.



Also you dont know whats unavoidable or not, and the only thing you can know for certain,

is if you strike first, you ll get a strike back.

Depends on how hard you strike, the US can destroy every single square nanometer in China. As you said they can destroy the entire globe at least one time. A country can't fight back if there is nothing left to fight for or with. So yeah a superpower can actually win a war, that is if you consider a huge part of the world being unliveable a win. I personally don't concider it a win and there are more efficient ways to destroy your opponent from the inside. (For instant releasing a defirtilizing virus that is not transferable to breath but can be deployed as gas and  is transdermal and blame it on terrorist) still, the thread is averted. 

 

Well first - no they can't. They can make it uninhabitable but cannot destroy every possible location for a missile silo. Also they can't just teleport the bombs instantaneously to their target. So this gives plenty of time for a counter-strike. Not to mention the mobile platforms for transcontinental ballistic missles. So, no, you can't avoid a MAD scenario.



tiffac on 07 December 2016

Avoids war with Russia but goes to war with China.

Fallout 5 baby!



UnderstatedCornHole on 07 December 2016
JRPGfan said:
UnderstatedCornHole said:

I don't disagree with you.

If war is iminent with any super power then a first strike is always the only possible option at staying alive.

I'm not surw what is wrong with stating that as a universal fact. "Iminent" by definition means unavoidable.

Thats just crazy.

You know they built those silo's to be able to withstand a attack right?

So the missils fly reguardless of who strikes first or not, both parties get hit.

Just being first doesnt win you a war like that. Both sides lose, its the only outcome.



Also you dont know whats unavoidable or not, and the only thing you can know for certain,

is if you strike first, you ll get a strike back.

I was more concerned with defining the term "inevitable" and "imminent" and any other relevant words so as to avoid miss communication.

I was giving my view on the assumption that the term "inevitable" and "imminent" mean "unavoidable".

If a war is truly inevitable, not by my assessment but by facts on the ground then it goes without saying a first strike is the only conceivable way of a positive outcome.