Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Politics and Government / Re: Richard Spencer's pal Jorjani wants concentration camps
« Last post by ironbite on September 20, 2017, 06:16:39 pm »
Shut up Lana.
92
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Askold on September 20, 2017, 06:02:09 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
Military are state annihilation machines? Yeeah, they can be used that way. Kind of like how your car can be used for drag racing-potentially.

Ah yes, the ever fun argument tactic of "ignore the general point of the reply and focus on the wording of the final line".

Direct question: do you think the United States has an obligation to retaliate if it is attacked, especially if we are attacked with a nuclear weapon? Yes or no.
I'm just going to point out that even a war isn't a binary choice where one nation must be eradicated.

If USA or any NATO country is attacked NATO can just beat back the attacker and force them to accept peace (and probably some heavy sanctions starting with reducing their military.)

Granted that USA seems to think otherwise. Iraq and Afghanistan were bombed back to stone age. Afghan specifically tried to surrender but US military went with "LOL nope, we want more blood" and continued fighting the war long after one side was waving the white flag.

https://theintercept.com/2017/08/22/afghanistan-donald-trump-taliban-surrender-here-we-are/

Now, had the surrended been accepted would that have somehow been worse for USA? I mean it would have meant less deaths all around. Less dead US military personnel, less dead Taliban and a lot less dead civilians. They could have kept on hunting Osama even without a war going on. Less money would have been needed for the rebuilding phase for certain.

This is not some video game where the war isn't over until every enemy unit has been shot. In fact, if USA showing up on their doorstep is enough to stop someone from invading a US ally isn't that a good thing? "Oh wait, you were serious about that NATO stuff? Ooopsy daisy, we'll just go back home, ok?" Huzzah! Medals for everyone! Let the diplomats handle the remaining issues.
93
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Eiki-mun on September 20, 2017, 05:43:26 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
Military are state annihilation machines? Yeeah, they can be used that way. Kind of like how your car can be used for drag racing-potentially.

Ah yes, the ever fun argument tactic of "ignore the general point of the reply and focus on the wording of the final line".

Direct question: do you think the United States has an obligation to retaliate if it is attacked, especially if we are attacked with a nuclear weapon? Yes or no.
94
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by dpareja on September 20, 2017, 05:02:22 pm »
http://americablog.com/2017/09/graham-cassidy-obamacare-repeal-get-2-minutes-debate.html

So, Graham-Cassidy, which will pretty much destroy the US health care system (or rather take it from the pile of rubble it currently is and turn it into little specks), might get 2 minutes of debate. If necessary. It's slated for all of 90 seconds.
95
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Tolpuddle Martyr on September 20, 2017, 04:45:59 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
Military are state annihilation machines? Yeeah, they can be used that way. Kind of like how your car can be used for drag racing-potentially.
96
But the alt-right seemed so nice!/s
97
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by pyro on September 20, 2017, 12:31:17 pm »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?

You're surprised that people are basically having Pavlovian reactions to these speeches? I don't think it actually matters what President Trump says: everybody is just going to respond the same way anyhow.
98
Politics and Government / Re: Mr. Trump Goes to Washington
« Last post by Eiki-mun on September 20, 2017, 10:36:11 am »
If the United States or its allies are attacked. People keep forgetting that second part, and it's important, since it actually makes the position quite reasonable - one might even say obvious.

If America's reaction to being attacked by a hostile state isn't to destroy that state, then what's the point of even having a military?
99
Forum Games / Re: Ask the next poster a question!
« Last post by SomeApe on September 20, 2017, 10:30:08 am »
Seems better to me.

But isn't it .net now?
100
Politics and Government / Re: Richard Spencer's pal Jorjani wants concentration camps
« Last post by Id82 on September 20, 2017, 08:29:21 am »
Well Trump pardoned Arpaio whos prison called tent city  was pretty much a concentration camp that he was proud of.
 
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]