Donald Trump

[SasaS]

2 hours ago, Anubis said:

 

Not a comparison with Obama, but an impartial objective analysis of Trump.

 

http://www.thehypertexts.com/Donald Trump Antichrist 666.htm

 

This is more from a theological perspective. For the thread about religion.

[Section_31]

2 hours ago, moof said:

Load of shite

You need a bit of that.

[TheHowieLama]

We've got lumps of it round the back

[Bjornebye]

I can sum this whole thread up below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

ma rootin scootin baby is driven me crazy 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

666

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wheres Kansas Toto?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rico1304]

I’ve just seen a graphic on twitter showing the extent of the wall.  It would be the same as building a wall from Lisbon to Minsk.  

[Rico1304]

Apparently he’s tweeted celebrating that the Dow has gone over 25,000.  Exactly a year after tweeting it went over 25,000 last time. 

[Section_31]

This is unreal this one. His intelligence chiefs spoke  before congress and basically said Iran isn't much of a threat. Trump tweeted that they 'needed to go back to school' as he knew more about Iran and intelligence than they did, and perhaps maybe anybody, believe me.

 

He then brought them into the Oval office for this.

[Jairzinho]

 

[Rico1304]

 

[Vincent Vega]

8 minutes ago, rico1304 said:

 

 

[SasaS]

15 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

 

Doom and gloom, but interesting.

He speaks a little about NAFTA which reminds me, don't much about it, but have always wondered: everybody seems to be complaining about it, it screwed the US, fucked up Mexico and I guess, Canada fared no better. How is this possible? Someone must have benefited. Surely if American industrial jobs went to Mexicans, Mexican workers must have benefited? Or not?
 

[Anny Road]

For the US this has nothing to do with Russia. It’s about getting out of the treaty so they can built up to fend off China. That is the threat to them.

[Anny Road]

Just watched a documentary about Japan.

US has tons of bases on Okinawa which is 2100km from Toyko the missiles in the banned range of the treaty are between 500km - 5,500km. Meaning the US could have medium range tackle nuke in the range of Tokyo.

Pyongyang is also 1,500km away.

All China's and N Korea's long range (within reach of US mainland) could potentially be take out in a preemptive strike.

I can see the sense in this from a strategic defense point of view.

[Jairzinho]

3 hours ago, SasaS said:

 Someone must have benefited. Surely if American industrial jobs went to Mexicans, Mexican workers must have benefited? Or not?
 

A few dozen rich Americans and, I suppose, compared to what came before, some poor Mexicans. In much the same way that you could argue Nike is good for some people in Bangladesh.

 

 

[polymerpunkah]

Yes, winners and losers.

 

I think, though, it's a nice easy target for those who are currently on the losing end in the USA, whether NAFTA-related or not.

 

So it serves as a simple rallying cry for demagogues like Trump.

 

In the end, he didn't make major changes to it. Just a few tweaks, a new name (to put "US" "first"), and carry on as you were.

[cloggypop]

He's going to kill us all 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/02/world/europe/russia-inf-treaty.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

[Rico1304]

2 hours ago, Anny Road said:

Just watched a documentary about Japan.

US has tons of bases on Okinawa which is 2100km from Toyko the missiles in the banned range of the treaty are between 500km - 5,500km. Meaning the US could have medium range tackle nuke in the range of Tokyo.

Pyongyang is also 1,500km away.

All China's and N Korea's long range (within reach of US mainland) could potentially be take out in a preemptive strike.

I can see the sense in this from a strategic defense point of view.

If it makes sense from ‘a strategic defense point of view’ is that the reason the treaty was worth doing? It was a demonstration of intent. 

[Anny Road]

5 minutes ago, rico1304 said:

If it makes sense from ‘a strategic defense point of view’ is that the reason the treaty was worth doing? It was a demonstration of intent. 

The treaty was put in place so Nato couldn't nuke Russia from the East Europe Border. I believe it was all about the proposed missile defense system. Plus it was handy from the European countries involved if Russian did not develop these.

[Rico1304]

Just now, Anny Road said:

The treaty was put in place so Nato couldn't nuke Russia from the east Europe border. I believe it was all about the proposed missile defense system. Plus it was handy from the European countries involved if Russian did not develop these.

So how does breaking it make sense? 

[Rico1304]

And missile defence is bollocks, it’s the biggest waste of money in the history of the world. 

[Anny Road]

1 minute ago, rico1304 said:

And missile defence is bollocks, it’s the biggest waste of money in the history of the world. 

You are probably right. The yanks I think were planning a fleet of ships capable of carrying medium range nukes.

[SasaS]

2 hours ago, Jairzinho said:

A few dozen rich Americans and, I suppose, compared to what came before, some poor Mexicans. In much the same way that you could argue Nike is good for some people in Bangladesh.

 

Well it is, isn't it, depending on what's the alternative? Don't know, I always think, until hundreds of millions of manufacturing workers in Asia are in a position to demand a decent income and conditions, there is little chance of survival of return of these "well-paying, unionized manufacturing jobs" Hedges and others nostalgically reminisce about. BTW, does this not sound a bit like a version of small town America in the 50s and 60s for the MAGA or conservative crowd? There is more chance the jobs will return in the form of robots it seems, then going back to what once was. And then "Bangladesh" is doubly fucked.

 

1 hour ago, polymerpunkah said:

Yes, winners and losers.

 

I think, though, it's a nice easy target for those who are currently on the losing end in the USA, whether NAFTA-related or not.

 

So it serves as a simple rallying cry for demagogues like Trump.

 

In the end, he didn't make major changes to it. Just a few tweaks, a new name (to put "US" "first"), and carry on as you were.

 

Yes, it looks like you could drown in the sea of conflicting views, the lazy option in the form of just skimming through what's on Wikipedia suggests the views depend on the crowd you are trying to appeal to. Bernie and Trump both against it.

[SammyAftershave]

I, for one, refuse to believe Trump is capable of spelling 'Treaty' on his own.

[Red Phoenix]

Tulsi Gabbard is launching her presidential campaign today and some of the media are already trying to associate her with Russia. This shit has got really out of hand.

[Strontium]

26 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Tulsi Gabbard is launching her presidential campaign today and some of the media are already trying to associate her with Russia. This shit has got really out of hand.

 

What's the world coming to when you can't even snuggle up to Assad without being called out for it.