Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The end game is either war or diplomacy. Trump is taking us to the former faster than any other president.
And if he ends up with the blood of a million or so South Koreans and US troops on his hands ...
He will blame it on Obama
There! Can you read your own writing?
Dumb ass!
Bet $500 that if Trump either starts or provokes a war that kills hundreds of thousands he won't blame it on Obama within a week?
Sign Here
X___________________________
The end game is either war or diplomacy. Trump is taking us to the former faster than any other president.
And if he ends up with the blood of a million or so South Koreans and US troops on his hands ...
He will blame it on Obama
There! Can you read your own writing?
Dumb ass!
Bet $500 that if Trump either starts or provokes a war that kills hundreds of thousands he won't blame it on Obama within a week?
Sign Here
X___________________________
There is enough blame to go around, starting with Clintoon!
I really do think Trump's gonna take North Korea out.
Nah, and Trump supporters better hope he doesn't try. For, if he orders such a hamhanded move, the military will refuse, and Trump will be impeached so fast, it will make our heads spin.
It's do-able. And i think Trump's gonna do it.
Trump can't do it. The military, obeying his order, can. And they won't.
Why do you think that? Do military commanders usually refuse to follow orders on your planet?
Rip that band aid off.As much damage as NK will do now, they'll do even more damage later if we don't.
To whom, exactly? Mutually assured destruction applies as much to them as it does to anyone else. In fact, I would wager that a nuclear North Korea would be safer than a nuclear Pakistan.
In four seconds?
No, a link to an NK missile landing in Japan's EEZ, you know, Japanese waters of at least some degree.
What do you propose should be done?
Invasion?
That option is sadly becoming ever more probable. It's a shame your hero, the obummer, didn't do squat about this little nutjob.
Jump in the deep end.Rip that band aid off.As much damage as NK will do now, they'll do even more damage later if we don't.
To whom, exactly? Mutually assured destruction applies as much to them as it does to anyone else. In fact, I would wager that a nuclear North Korea would be safer than a nuclear Pakistan.
Huh?
Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
NK is going to be painful no matter what we do.
Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
You need to break out a dictionary and look up threat.He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.Jump in the deep end.
You suffer less pain diving in and doing what needs to be done then you suffer with incrementalism/appeasement stalling things out.
While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
Russia threatens us with nukes, too. They have hundreds pointed at us as I type this.
I really do think Trump's gonna take North Korea out.
Nah, and Trump supporters better hope he doesn't try. For, if he orders such a hamhanded move, the military will refuse, and Trump will be impeached so fast, it will make our heads spin.
It's do-able. And i think Trump's gonna do it.
Trump can't do it. The military, obeying his order, can. And they won't.
Why do you think that? Do military commanders usually refuse to follow orders on your planet?
Of course they don't. But then again, we don't typically have a mentally and tempermentally unfit President giving those orders.
You need to break out a dictionary and look up threat.He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.While empty, pretty metaphor may be convincing to a child, it doesn't say anything to me at all. Could you put this in plain terms, regarding this topic?
Russia threatens us with nukes, too. They have hundreds pointed at us as I type this.
How about a little guy holding a nuke on you, give us your charity or else! We'll be paying welfare payments to every North Korea to keep him from pulling the trigger.You need to break out a dictionary and look up threat.He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.Either we attack him now and stop him, or we'll have to attack him later when he's stronger better able to give out damage.
Russia threatens us with nukes, too. They have hundreds pointed at us as I type this.
And you need to acknowledge that some threats are only verbal and more empty.... like, when a little guy says he is going to kill you, versus when a huge guy has a bazooka pointed at you.
Point being, silliness aside, that some threats are worse than others. I think you are onto something, in that, now that we know it's either reality or will soon be reality that he can lob a nuclear warhead into one of our metro areas, Kim will talk less about a first strike.
How about a little guy holding a nuke on you, give us your charity or else! We'll be paying welfare payments to every North Korea to keep him from pulling the trigger.You need to break out a dictionary and look up threat.He will threaten us with nukes if we don't throw money, and other welfare goodies at his ass.Or not attack them at all. I see the thinking there, but clearly nobody thinks he will lob a nuke at us. Else we would already have attacked.
Russia threatens us with nukes, too. They have hundreds pointed at us as I type this.
And you need to acknowledge that some threats are only verbal and more empty.... like, when a little guy says he is going to kill you, versus when a huge guy has a bazooka pointed at you.
Point being, silliness aside, that some threats are worse than others. I think you are onto something, in that, now that we know it's either reality or will soon be reality that he can lob a nuclear warhead into one of our metro areas, Kim will talk less about a first strike.
Ok yes, every president has failed in keeping NK from getting nuclear weapons. When people complain about this, they never say what Presidents SHOULD have done. What should Bush and Obama have done short of declaring war? Be specific. I also don’t expect Trump to be able to do anything about it either.Will Trump put an end to this supposed horrible threat or is he, like every president before him, just going to give Americans lip service?
I don't see any differences other than harsher rhetoric. What's the end game here?
