RiG Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) Trump: "We may have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea." Just what Japan and South Korea want to hear I guess. Edited September 19, 2017 by RiG "may" missing from quote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 20 minutes ago, RiG said: Trump: "We have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea." Just what Japan and South Korea want to hear I guess. Thank god the US didn't elect a sabre-rattler, eh kids? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Good lord. We may not see the morrow, friends. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmothecat2 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Bernie Sanders goes round telling the electorate and his party why they were wrong, and gets lauded for it, Hillary does the same and gets slaughtered. I wonder what the difference is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 9 hours ago, Savage Henry said: While that's true, it's more significant in the light that the monitoring was renewed post election, even after Trump claimed to have dumped Manafort completely. If Manafort has continued in his nefarious ways - and has been in contact with Trump all the while - then this could be extremely serious for Trump. Remember, this investigation isn't about Trump -despite his protestations. It's about his campaign team. If Trump has been so monumentally stupid as to continue working with people who are at serious risk of losing their liberty for the rest of their lives, then I can't see how he won't be forced to resign. But then, there's always been the suspicion that that is precisely what he wants to happen. Or they were trying to spy on Trump to set up the resistance within the government. It also recently came out that Obama National Security Advisor did unmask Trump people in intelligence reports that were spread around the government. She had repeatedly lied and said she didn't. If this was all above board they would have gone through the regular courts to restart a wiretap against the campaign manager of the opposition party Presidential candidate. Instead they went through the secret rubber stamp courts. 9 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: More white trash than the Valleys? I just looked up Welsh Valleys on the internet. Take the losers who both had low IQs and who were picked on as kids from that area and you have roughly the group that produces Juggalos. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 34 minutes ago, Jmothecat2 said: Bernie Sanders goes round telling the electorate and his party why they were wrong, and gets lauded for it, Hillary does the same and gets slaughtered. I wonder what the difference is. Bernie Sanders is widely, widely mocked as a crazy person. He gets way more shit, especially from important people, than Clinton does. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Baxter Parp is a fucking imbecile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 15 hours ago, Cerberus said: Trump is at the UN. He's moaning about the US paying 22% of the UN's budget. More than twice as much as 2nd placed Japan at 10%. He should cut that down for the lefty lolz. Maybe the US causes 22% of the problems which the UN has to solve? The Japanese maybe have a better case for complaining. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 52 minutes ago, Jmothecat2 said: Bernie Sanders goes round telling the electorate and his party why they were wrong, and gets lauded for it, Hillary does the same and gets slaughtered. I wonder what the difference is. If you're implying it's because of gender then your a bigger idiot than I thought. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 55 minutes ago, Jmothecat2 said: Bernie Sanders goes round telling the electorate and his party why they were wrong, and gets lauded for it, Hillary does the same and gets slaughtered. I wonder what the difference is. Clinton said she lost because white women were weak and did what they were told by their husbands. What has Bernie accused the electorate of? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 28 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: Bernie Sanders is widely, widely mocked as a crazy person. Even crazier than you,?you fucking fruitloop 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Bernie Sanders goes round telling the electorate and his party why they were wrong, and gets lauded for it, Hillary does the same and gets slaughtered. I wonder what the difference is. Why are you so thick? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmothecat2 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Why are you so thick? There's no way she would be copping as much stick as she does if she wasn't a woman. I know people hate it when that's pointed out but so be it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 There's no way she would be copping as much stick as she does if she wasn't a woman. I know people hate it when that's pointed out but so be it. I don't want you to expand on your original point. I want to know why you're so thick and who's to blame so I can give them a slap. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Married, white working class women voted overwhelmingly against Hillary because she didn't articulate a political program that appealed to them. There was the constant talk of shattering the glass ceilings. Lots of people have jobs, not careers. Often times these jobs are dull or hard. Even if they are enjoyable many women would prefer to be part time workers and not be under pressure to work full time to make ends meet for their family. Maybe Trump's talk of bringing back good jobs for their husbands appealed to them more than talk of already successful women becoming just a bit more successful. Maybe they'd like to see their son able to step out of the house and easily find work close by to support himself. Like it or not, campaigning with the mothers of black petty criminals shot by the police was a massive mistake. Hillary naively thought that white working class women would sympathize with their experience as mothers losing a son. During the OJ Simpson trial for murdering his white ex wife, his lawyers famously had the insight that race mattered more than gender. The prosecutors sought to stack the jury with women. The defense lawyers let the prosecutors accomplish their goal, but made sure the jury was stacked with black women. They made the defense revolve around race and the end result was an open and shut case becoming a not guilty verdict. All Hillary accomplished vis a vis white working class women was to remind them about the Democrat position on criminality. Hillary has spent the past decades surrounded with high powered, career oriented women and feminist activists. She forgot what appealed to the mass of normal women across the country. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 What should the US do if North Korea launches a first strike on the US or our allies? We would obviously launch an attack so devastating that millions would die. I'm not sure there's another option. Trump just articulated what has been the US policy for decades. As a side note, the 2nd in Command of NORAD in Colorado, a Canadian general, testified before the Canadian parliament that US policy as of now is to not attempt to shoot down any North Korean missile headed towards Canada. He said he wasn't sure if US commanders would disobey standing orders and shoot the missile down, but he said Canada shouldn't count on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 7 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: As a side note, the 2nd in Command of NORAD in Colorado, a Canadian general, testified before the Canadian parliament that US policy as of now is to not attempt to shoot down any North Korean missile headed towards Canada. He said he wasn't sure if US commanders would disobey standing orders and shoot the missile down, but he said Canada shouldn't count on it. A link would be nice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheProgressiveLiberal Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, welshbairn said: A link would be nice. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/north-korea-commons-1.4289866 Consequence of Canada's decision not to partner on missile defense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/north-korea-commons-1.4289866 Consequence of Canada's decision not to partner on missile defense. Can Canada not shoot it down? Genuine question 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, TheProgressiveLiberal said: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/north-korea-commons-1.4289866 Consequence of Canada's decision not to partner on missile defense. Sounds like Canada aren't too worried. Quote "It's not even clear the Americans want us in missile defence," said Michael Byers, a University of British Columbia defence policy expert, who argued Washington would prefer to see Canada spend more on its conventional defences. Joining ballistic missile defence would be "purely symbolic," he said, while acknowledging the situation with North Korea is extremely dangerous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.