Trump Regime thread.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

How is Hillary NOT guilty of obstruction of justice? She deleted thousands of emails and destroyed servers before a pending investigation. Isn't that like...the definition of obstruction of justice? lol

 

I am with you I THINK she is guilty. That said until I have solid proof of wrongdoing I cant say definitively. Any justice system that is valid has to operate under the supposition of innocence. We have heard she did it, we have heard she handed them over, we have heard she held onto some, and that she disclosed all. We really dont know. All of them lie and I would be interested to see who is lying this time, or at least lying the most.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Oh and re: North Korea. Shit like this is why I'd rather have Pence than trump. Pence would be an awful president, but he'd never do shit like this.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Oh and re: North Korea. Shit like this is why I'd rather have Pence than trump. Pence would be an awful president, but he'd never do shit like this.

 

Pence? The guy that thinks you can shock the gay out of someone ? I mean, I knew you hated Trump, but god damn. More than a dude that is literally that crazy?

 

[blotsfan 2,112]

Pence would respect the office of the president and not threaten to nuke foreign countries on a whim. It's an incredibly low bar, but that's where we're at.

 

Besides it's not like trump has been a pro LGBTQ president anyways.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Ok, this is not a serious political issue. Of all the things he's done this is practically irrelevant. Still, I feel like I must share:

 

The president of the United States just retweeted a twitter poll saying that he's better than obama. He is that desperate for validation.

Edited August 10, 2017 by blotsfan

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

I read an article that says Trump gets two binder fulls of information / articles / polls that tell him how great he is. I think we're at the point beyond realizing his ego is fragile and desperate for validation

[OSUViking 505]

Trump has to be using North Korea as a distraction for something. I feel like this is just saber rating. I saw a dude compare this to the Cuban Missile Crisis and I thought that was dramatic. Even if we genuinely are close to armed conflict here, the stakes aren't comparable atm. The Cuban Missile Crisis would have wiped out and enormous amount of America's population and military/industrial capacity.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Trump has to be using North Korea as a distraction for something. I feel like this is just saber rating. I saw a dude compare this to the Cuban Missile Crisis and I thought that was dramatic. Even if we genuinely are close to armed conflict here, the stakes aren't comparable atm. The Cuban Missile Crisis would have wiped out and enormous amount of America's population and military/industrial capacity.

 

Honestly, I think Trump just says what he thinks sometimes. And then you realize that he is a New Yorker and it isn't hard to believe he is both brash and abrasive and impulsive. I hate to stereotype New Yorkers, but... It's kinda true. lol.

 

I still think he put us into a bad spot though. Korea basically laughed at his comments... Then they released information that they were planning an attack on Guam. What was our response to that? No fire and fury yet. Even though I am against conflict or striking first... It really makes us look weak to threaten nations and then not do what we said we were going to.

 

He should have just kept his mouth shut.

[Thanatos 2,847]

What would you do if NK actually does bomb Guam? It has be a military response, clearly nothing else is going to get through to this asshole.

[blotsfan 2,112]

This man is horrendously unfit to be president.

 

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/895747111865790465

[Sarge+ 3,436]

He should have just kept his mouth shut.

 

"He Should Have Kept His Mouth Shut: The Rise and Fall of America's First Tweeter-in-Chief."

 

I bet you would make millions writing that.

[blotsfan 2,112]

This man is horrendously unfit to be president.

 

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/895747111865790465

Ok I'll be fair here. I guess he was being sarcastic. That's still a horrible response but it's still better than if he was serious (which from him nothing would surprise me).

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Trump threatening Korea again.. Saying we're "locked and loaded". Fantastic.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Trump threatening Korea again.. Saying we're "locked and loaded". Fantastic.

On the one hand, they're probably empty threats. On the other hand, I liked when our foreign policy wasn't the same as north korea's.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Oh yeah, like last time I think it's a lot of hot air. But holy hell... stop talking.

[Sarge+ 3,436]

 

"He Should Have Kept His Mouth Shut: The Rise and Fall of America's First Tweeter-in-Chief."

 

I bet you would make millions writing that.

 

^

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

China has come out and said they will NOT support or protect N. Korea if they launch a strike against the United States. And that's why you let them sink themselves and don't resort to petty threats.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Conversely, they've also said that they will defend North Korea and fight us if we attack first.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Thats my problem with this all though, so we have to let them hit us with the most powerful thing they have that can reach before we put a hurtin on this doucebag ? I dont like that at all.

Fuck China, aint nobody scared of that weak ass military.

 

This is one thing I love about Republicans, we are so far and away ahead of the rest of the world in the military its not close. Democrats and their peace loving hippy ass policy costs lives of those who have to roll through Iraq with sandbags in the floorboards instead of armored vehicles. Fuck them and their budget. Now if only we could teach republicans to stop startin wars over money we would be in business.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Omerta

[blotsfan 2,112]

Please stop acting concerned about soldiers' lives when you so flippantly want to start a war that will probably leave 10s of thousands of soldiers dead. How terrible of us "hippies" to want to avoid something like that.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Please stop acting concerned about soldiers' lives when you so flippantly want to start a war that will probably leave 10s of thousands of soldiers dead. How terrible of us "hippies" to want to avoid something like that.

 

I have more concern for our soldiers than you ever will. Its not my fault you belong to a party full of pussies who dont mind being threatened. In case you have not noticed we have been more than lenient with both of them, and if they want a fight it is time we stop running from them. The NK fight is coming whether we ant it to or not, the China fight is on them. If they want to fight to then lets dance bitches.

 

I think its funny you try to take the moral high ground. It is not my fault the left is always the neutered party who believes there is nothing worth fighting for/over. Your pussy ass party has been against every major war we have been in. The funny part is though, you always agree the region is a piece of shit. Kind of like people like you who are feminist white knights whose only chance of scoring is professing your hate for your own gender, but you don't want to address women's rights in a meaningful way. You want to be so lenient as to allow sharia law for religious freedom which is an affront to women everywhere. It is truly disgusting.

 

I care about soldiers, you sir, please don't act like you give a shit about us. You never pass up a chance to bag on the military. You hate us and that's OK.

 

Professional victim incoming.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Omerta

[blotsfan 2,112]

I have more concern for our soldiers than you ever will. Its not my fault you belong to a party full of pussies who dont mind being threatened. In case you have not noticed we have been more than lenient with both of them, and if they want a fight it is time we stop running from them. The NK fight is coming whether we ant it to or not, the China fight is on them. If they want to fight to then lets dance bitches.

 

Because China is a powerful country. Yes, we'd probably win a war with them, but I don't want thousands of soldiers to die when it can be avoided. You're talking like this is a freaking game of risk where all that matters is winning.

 

 

I think its funny you try to take the moral high ground.

If you knew anything about combat, you'd know that having the high ground is tantamount to victory (im so sorry).

 

It is not my fault the left is always the neutered party who believes there is nothing worth fighting for/over. Yours pussy ass party has been against every major war we have been in.

Not that nothing is worth fighting for. Just that discretion is the better part of valor. Out of curiosity though, how many wars of the last 50 years worked out well for us? Vietnam? Iraq? Iraq 2? Afghanistan?

 

 

The funny part is though, you always agree the region is a piece of shit. Kind of like people like you who are feminist white knights whose only chance of scoring is professing your hate for your own gender, but you don't want to address women's rights in a meaningful way.

 

First of all, holy shit you used the term white knight unironically. Fucking lol. Second of all, there are literally 0 women on this forum, unless someone is lying. So I'm saying this to get laid to show to an audience of women who live incredibly far away from me that don't actually exist? I don't think we've really touched on feminism much on this forum, but my thoughts go beyond simplistic "men are always evil." Because that's a strawman and you know it.

 

 

You want to be so lenient as to allow sharia law for religious freedom which is an affront to women everywhere. It is truly disgusting.

 

"Hey guys, we should treat Muslims like human beings" is not the same as "sharia law."

 

 

I care about soldiers, you sir, please dont act like you give a shit about us. You never pass up a chance to bag on the military. You hate us and thats ok.

You don't seem to understand the difference between soldiers and the military. Supporting soldiers is not the same as blindly supporting every action the military takes. I think the most supportive thing you can do for soldiers is to try and minimize the ones that die. That's not done by throwing a few hundred billion extra at the military budget. That's done by not blindly going to war guns blazing at every opportunity.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Winning is what matters. If we took out China and NK, the rest of the world wpuld be severly weakened militarily. The beat down we put on them would show the rest of the world we took a "powerful" Army and smacked them up. After that who would want a war with is. It is better to do itnow under Mattis and a half crazy/half retarded president but who has a certain bloodlust that can exploited to the benefit of the military.

 

This is a game of risk, but the difference is I have all the pieces. Think about what you're saying. Let them hit first. Of course China wants that, if they hit us in the right place it could cost billions and weaken our response. Once that happens and we retaliate there are no guarantees they will keep their word. What if they just want us weakend, go on the offensive with NK, and then have their opportu ity for whatever their play is here.

 

I understand the difference after meeting many people who say that. I dont want their support nor their sympathy as it is as fake as they are. Just say ypu dont support the military but you willing to make exceptions for certain soldiers or something. When people say things like that it is almost assuredly why.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Omerta

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Thats my problem with this all though, so we have to let them hit us with the most powerful thing they have that can reach before we put a hurtin on this doucebag ? I dont like that at all.

Fuck China, aint nobody scared of that weak ass military.

 

This is one thing I love about Republicans, we are so far and away ahead of the rest of the world in the military its not close. Democrats and their peace loving hippy ass policy costs lives of those who have to roll through Iraq with sandbags in the floorboards instead of armored vehicles. Fuck them and their budget. Now if only we could teach republicans to stop startin wars over money we would be in business.

 

I hate theoretical situations but let's pretend that we WILL wage war on N. Korea.

 

Option A: Let's say we play the wait and see approach, then they go on the offensive first. They don't necessarily even need to hit us. We have ships along the coasts , various layers of missile defense systems. If they launch a rocket at as, they will get fucked up and not have the support of ANYONE (virtually, anyway).

 

Option B: We get offended by idle threats of N. Korea and decide to declare war and blow them off the face of the map. We will face retaliation from definitely China and Russia. It would be, likely, World War III. And I don't believe that is much of an exaggeration.

 

We may win a WWIII but at what cost?

 

Option A sounds so infinitely better that I don't even see a positive to Option B. It just wouldn't be worth the loss that we would suffer.Option A... Yeah, maybe their missile(s) would get through... maybe not.. Some may die, and that would be tragic, but it would be likely TENS OF MILLIONS of lives less than Option A.

 

How is the loss of 100 million lives globally even close to acceptable?

[Omerta+ 1,206]

What if we wait and China lied ? What if they do get a missle by and it hits hard ?

 

The thing for me is I do not trust China to keep their word as the have been pulling the strings on this for a while. I think if we hit NK IN ANY WAY they dont deem acceptable they join anyway.

 

Also where is the tens of millions of lives... It wont cost the US more than 100000 I would wager.