fncceo
Diamond Member
- Nov 29, 2016
- 43,023
- 35,730
- 3,615
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the U
Because we can.
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.
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the U
But you clearly did say some of the dumbest shit we have ever heard - trying to paint North Korea as the victim and the U.S. as the "evil" oppressor.I clearly didn't say North Korea was on the side of the world, now did I?
Why is it acceptable for the left to ignore scientific biology and instead turn it into a state-of-mind, but it's not okay for me to "identify" as President of the United States?Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the US?
Ever heard of a little thing called THE KOREAN WAR???????????It's unacceptable for rouge regimes to threaten us with nuclear weapons. I'm all for a preemptive strike to destroy their nuclear capabilities.
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the US?
Whom have threatened with nuclear weapons? It's not the act of the threat itself, it's the fact that you have to take a nuclear threat seriously
The US doesn't threaten with nuclear weapons, it threatens with invasion, bombing, sanctions and the like. It's still a threat, and it's still US arrogance that North Korea "threatening" something they can't even deliver is bad, but the US actually doing something is okay. How many countries has North Korea invaded in the last 20 years?
So because North Korea hasn't invaded anyone that means we should their nuke threats seriously?
NK supported by the Chinese attempted to invade SK. NOT the other way around!
IF the US and it's allies decide to strike preemptively the NK rocket batteries, which have ALL been 'painted' will be vaporised by bombs delivered by B52s flying at 50K feet. The NK's will never know what happened.
The first MOAB will land on top of the Pervert's head.
That will destroy the country's C&C center.
Who the fuck liked kimchi anyway?
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the U
Because we can.
It's unacceptable for rouge regimes to threaten us with nuclear weapons. I'm all for a preemptive strike to destroy their nuclear capabilities.
Almost certainly. The US is the cowboy, the good guy, the guy committing the genocide against the bad guys, the injuns, the ones defending their land from the encroachers.
It's unacceptable for rouge regimes to threaten us with nuclear weapons. I'm all for a preemptive strike to destroy their nuclear capabilities.
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the US?
I'm not looking for anything to happen. I think that idiot in North Korea is willing to take a hit on his nuclear reactors and position the U.S. as an aggressor in effort to justify continuation of the war with South Korea. I just don't believe Trump will fall for the ploy.
Almost certainly. The US is the cowboy, the good guy, the guy committing the genocide against the bad guys, the injuns, the ones defending their land from the encroachers.
"Boo hoo ... history sucks, life is meaningless ... the Universe is pointless ..."
Write a play about it, Chekov.
Nobody want's a war.
Restraint from all parties is the word of the moment.
It's unacceptable for rouge regimes to threaten us with nuclear weapons. I'm all for a preemptive strike to destroy their nuclear capabilities.
Why is it acceptable for the US to threaten countries, but it's not okay for those countries to threaten the US?
It's also acceptable for the US to use WMD's on Japan but not for Syria to use them on ISIS.
Nobody want's a war.
Restraint from all parties is the word of the moment.
Actually you're wrong. There are plenty who want a war.
There are those who profit from war, the defense industry, the Republican Party. Then those who will use the fear and nationalist pride from war, the Republican Party again.... yes, people want war.
Or just trying to play the archetypal bully?
Or just trying to play the archetypal bully?
In what universe is being compared to a famous Russian playwright bullying, Dorothy Parker?