General US Politics

[Emperor Petitt]

While I do think the no-fly zone in Syria was a colossally bad idea, I don't see how Trump is any more trustworthy.

Hillary was actively pushing for killing allot of Syrians and Russians with that no fly zone, if you honestly think Russia would not declare war when you are actively killing its military personnel, you are insane. Russia doesn't have the capacity for a conventional war with the US, it's navy is all but nonexistent, and it's Air Force is out dated. Army would be a fair chance, and Russia's AA systems are better but that is it for a war without nukes, Russia loses. The only real advantage Russia gets is if you add in Nuclear weapons, which considering fighting the US navy is a no go, the best chance for Russia to survive would be Nuclear war. Putin isn't sane, so why would killing Russiams giving him the best excuse for war be a good bloody idea? Hell even Hillary can be quoted for saying "the nuclear option should never be taken off the table" publicly, she is equally insane. As for those poll numbers, if you tell a lie enough times it becomes true to people like a religion, in this case its corporate media's tales of what is Trump, and as I'm speaking CNN was hit with a lawsuit for racial discrimination, and the NYT had to clear out 10 floors of its main building because they lost so much revenue from posting lies. The rest of what you said has no relevance and will get zero attention.

[Tryhard]

Hillary was actively pushing for killing allot of Syrians and Russians with that no fly zone, if you honestly think Russia would not declare war when you are actively killing its military personnel, you are insane. Russia doesn't have the capacity for a conventional war with the US, it's navy is all but nonexistent, and it's Air Force is out dated. Army would be a fair chance, and Russia's AA systems are better but that is it for a war without nukes, Russia loses. The only real advantage Russia gets is if you add in Nuclear weapons, which considering fighting the US navy is a no go, the best chance for Russia to survive would be Nuclear war. Putin isn't sane, so why would killing Russiams giving him the best excuse for war be a good bloody idea? Hell even Hillary can be quoted for saying "the nuclear option should never be taken off the table" publicly, she is equally insane. As for those poll numbers, if you tell a lie enough times it becomes true to people like a religion, in this case its corporate media's tales of what is Trump, and as I'm speaking CNN was hit with a lawsuit for racial discrimination, and the NYT had to clear out 10 floors of its main building because they lost so much revenue from posting lies. The rest of what you said has no relevance and will get zero attention.

My point is not that they wouldn't (and yes, you are correct about Russians being outdated in almost every other regard), it's that putting the entire earth in crisis over it is insane. And you know Putin is insane, so I was merely stating that.

But let's be honest. Trump has had some more than worrying statements over nuclear weapons and he has definitely earned that mistrust by any rational individual in that regard, considering he reportedly constantly asked about "why can't we use nuclear weapons?" and even refusing to say that he didn't think nuking Europe was off the table. He has also stated at times that he didn't see a problem with South Korea, Japan, Saudi Arabia among other countries having their own nuclear proliferation. Sorry, but that's just as bad if not even worse than Hillary saying "the nuclear option should never be taken off the table", and it ain't because of "media lies" that people don't trust him with the nuclear codes.

Plus people don't exactly think best of his behaviour and demeanour - the man who lashes out at people who give his restaurant a bad review is expected to control a delicate situation?

Edited December 18, 2016 by Tryhard

[eclipse]

No, I know that people absolutely wouldn't. They would be screaming that this was the definition of corruption, collusion and corporatism. So why is it okay when someone like Trump does the exact same thing? Double standards, in my opinion.

This entire election is the definition of "double standards". If Hillary performed half of Trump's antics, she wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the number of votes she did.

[solrocknroll]

People say that Hillary's Russia treatment would be terrible.

Um, Trump has literally spent the past few weeks blatantly attacking China in tons of ways. I'm fairly certain that China is more powerful than Russia right now.

Trump's treatment of countries like Japan have also been pretty terrible. He literally does not care about anywhere but the US, the Middle East, and Russia.

[Phoenix Wright]

Hillary was actively pushing for killing allot of Syrians and Russians with that no fly zone, if you honestly think Russia would not declare war when you are actively killing its military personnel, you are insane. Russia doesn't have the capacity for a conventional war with the US, it's navy is all but nonexistent, and it's Air Force is out dated. Army would be a fair chance, and Russia's AA systems are better but that is it for a war without nukes, Russia loses. The only real advantage Russia gets is if you add in Nuclear weapons, which considering fighting the US navy is a no go, the best chance for Russia to survive would be Nuclear war. Putin isn't sane, so why would killing Russiams giving him the best excuse for war be a good bloody idea? Hell even Hillary can be quoted for saying "the nuclear option should never be taken off the table" publicly, she is equally insane. As for those poll numbers, if you tell a lie enough times it becomes true to people like a religion, in this case its corporate media's tales of what is Trump, and as I'm speaking CNN was hit with a lawsuit for racial discrimination, and the NYT had to clear out 10 floors of its main building because they lost so much revenue from posting lies. The rest of what you said has no relevance and will get zero attention.

she's bluffing. the nuclear option is not a real "option" worth considering, it's a threat.

This entire election is the definition of "double standards". If Hillary performed half of Trump's antics, she wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the number of votes she did.

um, isn't this pretty much parallel with what tryhard said? lol

[eclipse]

um, isn't this pretty much parallel with what tryhard said? lol

Yep! However, it's not an opinion I see that often, which baffles me.

[Phoenix Wright]

are...are you sure? nearly throughout the election, trump would say a thing, and we'd think "wow, he most certainly will be done with now." i even thought at one point that trump's inclusion would be the implosion of the party. and we all knew that if hillary behaved in a similar way she would be met with hostility, and indeed took a huge hit when she called some of trump's followers deplorables.

[eclipse]

are...are you sure? nearly throughout the election, trump would say a thing, and we'd think "wow, he most certainly will be done with now." i even thought at one point that trump's inclusion would be the implosion of the party. and we all knew that if hillary behaved in a similar way she would be met with hostility, and indeed took a huge hit when she called some of trump's followers deplorables.

That's looking at it from Trump's POV. What I didn't see were comparisons to what would happen if Clinton acted like that ("Christians are the cancer in our country" or something equally ridiculous while demonizing some issue or other on the other side and pandering to her base).

[Yojinbo]

Putin is far from insane.

And the whole no-fly zone over Syria thing honestly just reeks of an excuse to drag him into a war. Having been summoned by Syria's legitimate head of state to help fighting the terrorists, there'd be no way for him to satisfy the modalities of a no-fly zone.

For many populist voters anti establishmentism is something to strive for by virtue of it being against the establishment. As long as the establishment suffers a great deal of populist voters will be happy no matter what happens

Trump can do whatever he likes and because he's anti establishment many supporters won't mind nearly as much as when that ''evil'' establishment would have done it.

Trump supposedly being anti-establishment has not been exposed as a meme yet?

[Life]

Putin is far from insane.

And the whole no-fly zone over Syria thing honestly just reeks of an excuse to drag him into a war. Having been summoned by Syria's legitimate head of state to help fighting the terrorists, there'd be no way for him to satisfy the modalities of a no-fly zone.

It wasn't an excuse. This would 100% be an act of war.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/12/no-fly-zone-aleppo-war-russia-syria

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4621738/dunford-tells-wicker-controlling-airspace-syria-means-war-russia-mccain-throws-tantrum-dunford

http://www.infowars.com/russia-launches-no-fly-zone-threatens-war-with-us/

When the rather far-left (The Guardian) and the far-right (Info Wars) agree on this, we can safely say that Hillary's stance on foreign policy would have been nothing short of disastrous (and terrifying for me because I would probably get nuked off the planet). There was a reason why the Kremlin were celebrating when Trump won. My guess is it was because ​Trump winning meant that they knew that they wouldn't go to war with the USA.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Life

[Etrurian emperor]

There was a reason why the Kremlin were celebrating when Trump won. My guess is it was because ​Trump winning meant that they knew that they wouldn't go to war with the USA.

My guess was because the Russians knew that Trump would hand European interests over to Putin on a silver platter.

Edited December 18, 2016 by Etrurian emperor

[Life]

My guess was because the Russians knew that Trump would hand European interests over to Putin on a silver platter.

Like what? You need to expand on this.

[Etrurian emperor]

Like what? You need to expand on this.

Well, out of the two candidates who doubted Nato and the responsibility to defend European allies, who's a fan of Populists who wants to make Europe less able to defend itself and who is giving the job of secretary of states to a man with very close business ties to Putin?

It may not be for the best but right now Europe needs America to defend its interests against Russia and right now Trump seems to be in the process of selling us out. Can we dismiss Trumps statements regarding NATO as empty election talk? We really can't because if we turn out to be wrong on that we are going to be in very deep trouble.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Etrurian emperor

[Life]

Well, out of the two candidates who doubted Nato and the responsibility to defend European allies, who's a fan of Populists who wants to make Europe less able to defend itself and who is giving the job of secretary of states to a man with very close business ties to Putin?

It may not be for the best but right now Europe needs America to defend its interests against Russia and right now Trump seems to be in the process of selling us out. Can we dismiss Trumps statements regarding NATO as empty election talk? We really can't because if we turn out to be wrong on that we are going to be in very deep trouble.

Correct me if I'm reading this wrong but are you implying that America should not do what is in America's best interests and rather what is in Europe's best interests because of Russia? Just because Europe needs America doesn't necessarily mean that that is in America's best interest. It sounds like you're trying to possibly justify war with Russia.

​And correct this too. Are you suggesting that there might be a Russian invasion of Europe incoming? Because all I'm reading here is fearmongering as if we're all going to be speaking Russian in a decade.

​You do know that all of the populists are gaining power because the EU has massively cocked things up in Europe, correct?

Edited December 19, 2016 by Pepe The Conquerer

[solrocknroll]

Putin is a monster that must be stopped. While he might not be invading other countries, his disgusting, irredeemable invasion of human rights and monsterous treatment of LGBT individuals means he must be stopped at all costs. Same with the Middle East. We need to displace these horrific human rights locations in order to save the people that live there who are being victimized.

[Life]

Putin is a monster that must be stopped. While he might not be invading other countries, his disgusting, irredeemable invasion of human rights and monsterous treatment of LGBT individuals means he must be stopped at all costs. Same with the Middle East. We need to displace these horrific human rights locations in order to save the people that live there who are being victimized.

Flashback: Iraq, 2003. Libya, 2011.

Yeah, how'd that go?

Seriously, as someone who actually lives in the Middle East, I will ask you plainly. Can you stop fucking up this region which is already a giant fucking mess? I don't care why you want to, just stop overthrowing dictators. That shit never goes well.

Also, I am very glad that you are for the deaths of MILLIONS just to help like... 0.03% of people in Russia because we all know that you only care about a very small minority of people and have advocated death for anyone who doesn't share your ideology regarding LGBTQAII+ (silent X, triple-purple). If I missed a group there in the ever-growing rainbow, let me know.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Pepe The Conquerer

[Moira]

Also, I am very glad that you are for the deaths of MILLIONS just to help like... 0.03% of people in Russia because we all know that you only care about a very small minority of people and have advocated death for anyone who doesn't share your ideology regarding LGBTQAII+ (silent X, triple-purple). If I missed a group there in the ever-growing rainbow, let me know.

was that last part really necessary to get your point across

[Life]

was that last part really necessary to get your point across

Yes and no. Wanted to point out the absurdity of his stance so I went with the absurd. For all I know, those categories might exist because this wasn't a hoax.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/transgender-father-stefonknee-wolscht-who-left-family-to-be-a-six-year-old-girl-uses-childs-play-to-a6775051.html

And people asked me why I left Toronto. This is not normal and should not be considered socially acceptable behaviour. I wouldn't make it illegal but I have no problem with mocking the absurd.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Pepe The Conquerer

[solrocknroll]

You seem to really love calling out anti-semitism when it comes up. and yet you hold this to somehow different standards?

how dare you mock this. the "ever expanding rainbow" is something homophobes use solely. your backwards views are what are killing society and allowing for terrible rulers to rise

no one cares about "socially acceptable behavior" get out of her life and don't speak if you can't say such hideous hateful comments

[Life]

You seem to really love calling out anti-semitism when it comes up. and yet you hold this to somehow different standards?

how dare you mock this. the "ever expanding rainbow" is something homophobes use solely. your backwards views are what are killing society and allowing for terrible rulers to rise

no one cares about "socially acceptable behavior" get out of her life and don't speak if you can't say such hideous hateful comments

Very easily.

​I don't advocate for people to go to jail for calling me a kike or calling for war against a country that doesn't believe in my ideology. In fact, I am against R v Keegstra and that is a case that I even argue with my family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Keegstra

Read it and you'll figure out why I should be for it. And like I said, I'm against it.

[eclipse]

That article has a very different point of view, to say the least.

Either way, the two of you above me are handling it badly, because hostility isn't going to make either side change their mind/make them better people/enact any other positive change. I think the article poses a very interesting ethical question, but it's not politics, which is what this thread is about.

[solrocknroll]

That article has a very different point of view, to say the least.Either way, the two of you above me are handling it badly, because hostility isn't going to make either side change their mind/make them better people/enact any other positive change. I think the article poses a very interesting ethical question, but it's not politics, which is what this thread is about.

Okay, fine, but I think you can at least agree that his member title and username are horribly offensive and they need to be changed.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Voltrash

[Life]

Okay, fine, but I think you can at least agree that his member title and username are horribly offensive and they need to be changed.

I'm quoting Alex Jones because it's hilarious. I put the quote in my signature in full.

[solrocknroll]

I'm quoting Alex Jones because it's hilarious. I put the quote in my signature in full.

It's unfunny and offensive regardless. And here, you have no authority over what is considered offensive.

It might be one of the most tasteless things I have ever read.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Voltrash

[Moira]

Yes and no. Wanted to point out the absurdity of his stance so I went with the absurd. For all I know, those categories might exist because this wasn't a hoax.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/transgender-father-stefonknee-wolscht-who-left-family-to-be-a-six-year-old-girl-uses-childs-play-to-a6775051.html

And people asked me why I left Toronto. This is not normal and should not be considered socially acceptable behaviour. I wouldn't make it illegal but I have no problem with mocking the absurd.

This isn't really the point of this thread so I'll try to keep it brief

I understand why you would see a case like this to be unreasonable, and as someone who has spent a lot of time in lgbt circles, I have heard plenty of things that I can imagine most people would find absurd. However, that's not really grounds to be generally dismissive of lgbt as a group, countless of people are just trying to be themselves under conditions that do not allow them to, and dismissing the group based on outliers like someone saying they're 6 years old isn't really fair. I understand it was supposed to be more of an absurd comment, but its a sentiment that is held by a lot of people, so I still feel like it should be addressed.