|
Barracuda Bang! posted:Those are Nazis, correct? I mean, Trump's platform is racial expulsion, military expansion, and massive, state-run building programs....
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
Joementum posted:I mean, Trump's platform is racial expulsion, military expansion, and massive, state-run building programs.... Also fear of foreigners who are external criminals coming to threaten the white race.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:12
|
|
|
President Trump would make great deals with other leaders and have them all declaring, "Peace in our time".
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:14
|
|
|
Kor posted:Someone in the thread, during the middle of his speech in Phoenix, compared "When did we beat Japan at anything?" "@BetteMidler is an extremely unattractive woman" Donald "I'm starting to wonder myself whether he was born in this country" Trump's rhetoric as something more akin to late 19th century populism than anything from the past century of the Republican platform. usbombshell posted:Has this been posted? "Did you notice that baby was crying through half of the speech and I didn’t get angry?" "@BetteMidler is an extremely unattractive woman" Donald "I'm starting to wonder myself whether he was born in this country" Trump tweeted an image with the Waffen-SS in it. Joementum posted:I mean, Donald Trump's platform is racial expulsion, military expansion, and massive, state-run building programs....  Fuckin' called it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:20
|
|
|
Kor posted:
Yeah, no one else saw that. You are a special snowflake. Edit, that was 3 days ago, lol. Pohl fucked around with this message at 11:41 on Jul 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Donald Trump knows America no better than the nazis, gets Ted Rall's enthusiastic endorsement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Kor posted:
Absurd Alhazred posted:
Hey Kor, what's it like to be a nazi? Pohl fucked around with this message at 11:49 on Jul 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
Regardless of anyone's feelings on MAD, a nuclear Iran would lock both the Iranian and US governments in hostile, drumbeat, fearmode for a generation. I'm actually surprised the Iranian government is willing to agree to any of this, the more the US and Isreal bear down on them and the more surrounded by enemies they appear the more support the hardliners and psychopaths in charge of Iran will receive. If Obama can convince them to not only give up nuclear ambitions, but also begin normalizing relations through lifting of sanctions and co-operating over ISIS etc., he doesn't just preserve nuclear nonproliferation, he starts convincing the Iranian people they don't need a pack of religious and ultraconservative nutjobs in charge but can be part of the cool club of relaxed developed democratic nations. For about five minutes until Israel fucks it all up again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
My biggest worry about a nuclear Iran is that maybe two months after they get a working weapon, Israel would manage to get someone in to detonate it wherever Iran had it hidden, at which point Iran has to deal with the literal and figurative fallout.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:38
|
|
|
He missed a fine opportunity to go "Rand for life".
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:39
|
|
|
Also, a nuclear Iran leads to a nuclear Saudi Arabia and maybe other states like Turkey or Egypt. The more idiot countries that have bombs, the more likely somebody gets nuked when a flock of geese gets misread on radar. Nuclear non-proliferation is the way to go. We really need to stop pretending and squeeze Israel to give up theirs as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:43
|
|
|
Fargo Fukes posted:Regardless of anyone's feelings on MAD, a nuclear Iran would lock both the Iranian and US governments in hostile, drumbeat, fearmode for a generation. I'm actually surprised the Iranian government is willing to agree to any of this, the more the US and Isreal bear down on them and the more surrounded by enemies they appear the more support the hardliners and psychopaths in charge of Iran will receive. If Obama can convince them to not only give up nuclear ambitions, but also begin normalizing relations through lifting of sanctions and co-operating over ISIS etc., he doesn't just preserve nuclear nonproliferation, he starts convincing the Iranian people they don't need a pack of religious and ultraconservative nutjobs in charge but can be part of the cool club of relaxed developed democratic nations. For about five minutes until Israel fucks it all up again. You are loving crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:57
|
|
|
don Jaime posted:Also, a nuclear Iran leads to a nuclear Saudi Arabia and maybe other states like Turkey or Egypt. The more idiot countries that have bombs, the more likely somebody gets nuked when a flock of geese gets misread on radar. Nuclear non-proliferation is the way to go. We really need to stop pretending and squeeze Israel to give up theirs as well. Also,
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
It's obscene that Israel is a nuclear state, behaves like a nuclear state, insists it isn't a nuclear state, and the US and Europe say, "Eh, guess so, want some more money?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
I hosed this post up, thanks!
Pohl fucked around with this message at 14:22 on Jul 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:33
|
|
|
And I Rand, I Rand so far away...
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
I know it was a million pages ago, but I just want to chime in and say that Scott Walker using "Shippin' Up To Boston" may have literally broken irony. It's possibly several magnitudes worse than Reagan/"Born in the USA". We can ignore for a second that Dropkick Murphys has probably 10-15 pro union songs in their recorded out put, including covers of depression era classics like "Which Side Are You On". We can continue by ignoring that the lyrics were penned by noted super left, pro-union hero Woody Guthrie. But I feel like you probably shouldn't use a song by a band that has literally written a protest song about you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_Out_in_Style#Musical_style https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKgM68MzXpg
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Is this real? This has to be a parody. It isn't a parody, is it. I can confirm that the best way to interpret Walker's message here is to read it in the voice of a phone sex line for gun enthusiasts. I did, haven't looked back since.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:51
|
|
|
Pohl posted:What? Why 2 months? Why not 1 or 3? If Iran get bomb, then Israel would make bomb explode.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Nativity In Black posted:But I feel like you probably shouldn't use a song by a band that has literally written a protest song about you. Frankly this just plays into Walker's image of "They seriously loving hate me, isn't that awesome? Vote for me if you love that they hate me!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
greatn posted:Donald Trump knows America no better than the nazis, gets Ted Rall's enthusiastic endorsement. It works cause trumps hair can only be portrayed by Ralls unique "style".
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Pohl posted:What? Why 2 months? Why not 1 or 3? He's saying Mossad would detonate Iran's own nuke in their backyard. Mossad does have a history of detonating Iran's own nuclear scientists in their own backyard. It's a little Tom Clancy fanfictiony but not difficult to understand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
Iran with the bomb changes the dynamics of our relationship. It's then in the U.S.'s (and really, the world's) best interest to ensure that the current regime remains in power and complete control. Anything less, and you could have unsecure weapons in the hands of an unknown and likely Islamist faction.That's not terribly good for the Iranian people, or for international relations. Worse, it would cause an arms race. Do you think a Nuclear armed Egypt or Yemen would be the most stable places? Already, Pakistan is a nightmare waiting to happen, with the amount of religious extremists within their borders.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
DutchDupe posted:Wasn't a Pakistani nuclear physicist responsible for all sorts of nuclear proliferation with Iran, Libya, North Korea? A few pages back but this is who you're looking for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan The nuclear arms race in the Middle East started when Israel obtained their nuclear weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Barracuda Bang! posted:Those are Nazis, correct? Technically, they're WWII re-enactors dressed as Nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Pohl posted:You are loving crazy. It's called detente. It happens. And a side effect of it happening is the populace of both countries being able to breathe freely for long enough to wonder why everyone in charge is a frothing lunatic. edit: (this is also why the Republicans, as standard-bearers of the forthing lunatic movement, will never approve any deal with Iran)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Fargo Fukes posted:It's called detente. It happens. And a side effect of it happening is the populace of both countries being able to breathe freely for long enough to wonder why everyone in charge is a frothing lunatic. Did not work in Pakistan
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:48
|
|
|
Nativity In Black posted:I know it was a million pages ago, but I just want to chime in and say that Scott Walker using "Shippin' Up To Boston" may have literally broken irony. It's possibly several magnitudes worse than Reagan/"Born in the USA". We can ignore for a second that Dropkick Murphys has probably 10-15 pro union songs in their recorded out put, including covers of depression era classics like "Which Side Are You On". We can continue by ignoring that the lyrics were penned by noted super left, pro-union hero Woody Guthrie. But I feel like you probably shouldn't use a song by a band that has literally written a protest song about you. Walker knows exactly what he's doing. The Dropkick Murphys have made it clear that they despise Walker and don't want him using their work but he's going to keep playing it until they sue because being a spiteful rear end in a top hat is a huge part of today's GOP platform.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
Nate Silver has a good breakdown of the "Bernie's surge = Failary Clinton" nonsense. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-bernie-sanders-surge-is-about-bernie-not-hillary/
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Nate Silver has a good breakdown of the "Bernie's surge = Failary Clinton" nonsense. For all the reasons he listed for potentially not wanting Clinton as the candidate, not a single one was "Someone so closely related to a former President shouldn't be running for President."
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
So, I guess the best solution is to not let Iran get the bomb but convince the world that they do have the bomb "Oh poo poo we need this treaty because they have one deliverable nuke and we don't want them getting more!" then we quietly go in and break all their slide rules so they can never make one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
Brannock posted:For all the reasons he listed for potentially not wanting Clinton as the candidate, not a single one was "Someone so closely related to a former President shouldn't be running for President." How does that damage his argument?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Why yes, yes they are In fairness, it turns out those were reenactors roleplaying as nazis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:56
|
|
|
quote:For all the reasons he listed for potentially not wanting Clinton as the candidate, not a single one was "Someone so closely related to a former President shouldn't be running for President." Is a political dynasty something you (and not just you, forums poster Brannock) consider bad enough to warrant being prohibited legally, and if so, along what criteria? Say, up to which degree of consanguinity? This isn't specifically a Hillary/Bush thing, but the issue has come up in my country recently in the form of a proposed bill: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
I don't like the false dichotomy. Just because someone is for Bernie as the candidate doesn't mean they are against Hillary. I'm for Sanders and Clinton as nominee, in that order, and I'll be happy with either one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:In fairness, it turns out those were reenactors roleplaying as nazis. I'm honestly not sure if that's better or worse. "They're not actual Nazis, just guys who spend their weekends roleplaying as fascist soldiers!" Like, I'm not gonna sit here and try to analyze what evil lurks in the hearts of historical reenactors, 'cause I don't know those guys beyond the picture, but it really doesn't make it any better.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 17:00
|
|
|
 Chafee  http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/55a663fde4b0c5f0322bd272?ir=Politics
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:45 |
|
|
Kor posted:I'm honestly not sure if that's better or worse. "They're not actual Nazis, just guys who spend their weekends roleplaying as fascist soldiers!" It doesn't matter, the photoshop is bad and hilarious either way but hey at least it only features guys pretending to have committed war crimes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 17:02
|
|