"unfortunately, sir, you have no choice, you will be a wartime president!" - Mad Dog Mattis to Trump

[Penelope]

The left has become simply a party of appeasers. Had these idiots been around in 1940 they would have said "just make a treaty with Hitler and send him money. We can trust him." Now they want to appease Kim Jon Un because he is their idol for making government control every aspect of the people's lives.

Who told us all that the US government. Like our gov. cares how he treats his people. We never do anything for humanitarian reasons, never and we shouldn't. Its all about trade with China and not wanting them to be friends with SK. We are hurting them more with sanctions than Kim would.

Nk has about 25 million people in a country that fits 3 inside of Texas which is about 27 million. Very crowded. I doubt they were even think about starting a war with us.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I promise you Lil Kim doesnt think he'd win a war with the U.S.

Yes, I think he does. Just because you think it is improbable doesn't mean it is, either. Japan thought they would win, too. They didn't, but it took a long time to defeat them and Vietnam DID win. Remember that we have been retreating in effectiveness ever since we lost Vietnam. Long ten+ year wars, always losing, never winning or even holding in Afghanistan and Iraq and everywhere else (and there seem to be a lot of hidden wars going on -- Libya, Somalia, Yemen, etc. Hidden by Obama.).

The geopolitical situation is such that we can't afford to fight with NoKo at all, so he can pretty much do what he wants. Any war starting means the instant death of South Korea as a whole and world war with China and Pakistan --- so how can we do a preemptive strike? Big problem.

Look at the big, clear smiles on the faces of Kim and his cohorts in every news photo. Nobody smiles like that unless they are sure they are winning.

They are.

Japan had reason to think they might win.
Vietnam didnt win,we gave it to them by playing by ridiculous ROE placed on our military by politicians.

There is no one country that can defeat the U.S. unless we go the MAD route where nobody wins.

 

[Circe]

Japan had reason to think they might win.

Yes, and it took years and the invention of the atom bomb to defeat them. Orientals are bad enemies. Oh, and I forgot: we already lost a war in North Korea. That Armistice: never, never, never do an armistice. The one after WWI didn't work out, either. If we learned one thing in the 20th century I hope it is, never never do an armistice! Win or lose, but this 70 year "we're still at war" think with NoKo has NOT worked out, I think many would agree.

Vietnam didnt win,we gave it to them by playing by ridiculous ROE placed on our military by politicians.

Okay, my bad, they didn't win, we lost. Just like we're losing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other sandpit on the globe where we seem to be fighting at the moment. Losing is losing. Let's don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Again.

There is no one country that can defeat the U.S. unless we go the MAD route where nobody wins.

Actually, MAD worked pretty well. It's the only thing that has worked. I simply do not understand why some people on the right say no country can defeat us when EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY has defeated us since WWII. Well, except for Grenada with it's nutmeg trees, and I guess Serbia, too. Otherwise, we're what --- two wins and 27 losses.

I think it would be interesting to figure out why, and whether there is any sense in which we can say this worked well for us. I'm thinking not, but I could be wrong. Maybe losing is the way to go so we don't scare people. We are sort of big and fierce and scary, and look what happened when Germany tried that on, twice.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I promise you Lil Kim doesnt think he'd win a war with the U.S.

Yes, I think he does. Just because you think it is improbable doesn't mean it is, either. Japan thought they would win, too. They didn't, but it took a long time to defeat them and Vietnam DID win. Remember that we have been retreating in effectiveness ever since we lost Vietnam. Long ten+ year wars, always losing, never winning or even holding in Afghanistan and Iraq and everywhere else (and there seem to be a lot of hidden wars going on -- Libya, Somalia, Yemen, etc. Hidden by Obama.).

The geopolitical situation is such that we can't afford to fight with NoKo at all, so he can pretty much do what he wants. Any war starting means the instant death of South Korea as a whole and world war with China and Pakistan --- so how can we do a preemptive strike? Big problem.

Look at the big, clear smiles on the faces of Kim and his cohorts in every news photo. Nobody smiles like that unless they are sure they are winning.

They are.

Hunt and OPEC

The war that will pacify all our enemies is the seizure of Moslem oilfields. That contraband wealth will bankrupt the jihad and finance the solution to every other problem spot.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Japan had reason to think they might win.

Yes, and it took years and the invention of the atom bomb to defeat them. Orientals are bad enemies. Oh, and I forgot: we already lost a war in North Korea. That Armistice: never, never, never do an armistice. The one after WWI didn't work out, either. If we learned one thing in the 20th century I hope it is, never never do an armistice! Win or lose, but this 70 year "we're still at war" think with NoKo has NOT worked out, I think many would agree.

Vietnam didnt win,we gave it to them by playing by ridiculous ROE placed on our military by politicians.

Okay, my bad, they didn't win, we lost. Just like we're losing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other sandpit on the globe where we seem to be fighting at the moment. Losing is losing. Let's don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Again.

There is no one country that can defeat the U.S. unless we go the MAD route where nobody wins.

Actually, MAD worked pretty well. It's the only thing that has worked. I simply do not understand why some people on the right say no country can defeat us when EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY has defeated us since WWII. Well, except for Grenada with it's nutmeg trees, and I guess Serbia, too. Otherwise, we're what --- two wins and 27 losses.

I think it would be interesting to figure out why, and whether there is any sense in which we can say this worked well for us. I'm thinking not, but I could be wrong. Maybe losing is the way to go so we don't scare people. We are sort of big and fierce and scary, and look what happened when Germany tried that on, twice.

Genever Believer, RETURN TO SENDER

To make it clear why we lose so often, every bodybag shipped full back to America should have ROE stamped on it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Japan had reason to think they might win.

Yes, and it took years and the invention of the atom bomb to defeat them. Orientals are bad enemies. Oh, and I forgot: we already lost a war in North Korea. That Armistice: never, never, never do an armistice. The one after WWI didn't work out, either. If we learned one thing in the 20th century I hope it is, never never do an armistice! Win or lose, but this 70 year "we're still at war" think with NoKo has NOT worked out, I think many would agree.

Vietnam didnt win,we gave it to them by playing by ridiculous ROE placed on our military by politicians.

Okay, my bad, they didn't win, we lost. Just like we're losing in Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other sandpit on the globe where we seem to be fighting at the moment. Losing is losing. Let's don't get involved in a land war in Asia. Again.

There is no one country that can defeat the U.S. unless we go the MAD route where nobody wins.

Actually, MAD worked pretty well. It's the only thing that has worked. I simply do not understand why some people on the right say no country can defeat us when EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY has defeated us since WWII. Well, except for Grenada with it's nutmeg trees, and I guess Serbia, too. Otherwise, we're what --- two wins and 27 losses.

I think it would be interesting to figure out why, and whether there is any sense in which we can say this worked well for us. I'm thinking not, but I could be wrong. Maybe losing is the way to go so we don't scare people. We are sort of big and fierce and scary, and look what happened when Germany tried that on, twice.

If we were to take the gloves off we'd make short work of most militaries/countries in the world.
All you really need to do is look at countries from around the world and compare hardware and numbers to the U.S.
Nothing even comes close.

The Chinese can barely feed themselves and there is no way they could withstand a protracted war.
The Russians I believe would give us a run for our money in the beginning of a war but they dont have near our numbers when it comes to aircraft,carriers and weapons in general.
Their manufacturing base is suspect as is the quality of arms produced.

 

[Circe]

If we were to take the gloves off we'd make short work of most militaries/countries in the world.
All you really need to do is look at countries from around the world and compare hardware and numbers to the U.S.
Nothing even comes close.

But we don't ever, ever, take the gloves off. Not any more, not since Vietnam, or I should say Korea. (tactical nukes we did not use) I don't think we can: too many leftists are not supporting really anything about the U.S. or the military. They would give the nation to the Chicoms, I think, rather than fighting. And our military knows that and so they never fight to win, and never win.

The Chinese can barely feed themselves and there is no way they could withstand a protracted war.
The Russians I believe would give us a run for our money in the beginning of a war but they dont have near our numbers when it comes to aircraft,carriers and weapons in general.
Their manufacturing base is suspect as is the quality of arms produced.

I don't think the Russkies are our biggest problem (160 million, or less, we have double that), but the Chinese have FIVE TIMES our population, the heavy majority male, and could invade through Mexico: I think they are the only population that could. It is true the Chinese can't feed themselves, but getting rid of a lot of mouths at war and taking over a rich agricultural country would help that and be a lot of incentive.

I'm more concerned about Pakistan than about Russia: Pakistan has more people. And they are Muslim, determined fighters, as we know.

Well, I know there is sure to be war soon somewhere, there always is, Mattis is right about that. It will probably break out over something unexpected, as so often. And we will probably not fight well and not win, as so often. We live in a divided country: half of the citizens will certainly side with the enemy.

 

[Mr Natural]

America without a military escapade is like non-alcoholic beer or decafinated coffee.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If we were to take the gloves off we'd make short work of most militaries/countries in the world.
All you really need to do is look at countries from around the world and compare hardware and numbers to the U.S.
Nothing even comes close.

But we don't ever, ever, take the gloves off. Not any more, not since Vietnam, or I should say Korea. (tactical nukes we did not use) I don't think we can: too many leftists are not supporting really anything about the U.S. or the military. They would give the nation to the Chicoms, I think, rather than fighting. And our military knows that and so they never fight to win, and never win.

The Chinese can barely feed themselves and there is no way they could withstand a protracted war.
The Russians I believe would give us a run for our money in the beginning of a war but they dont have near our numbers when it comes to aircraft,carriers and weapons in general.
Their manufacturing base is suspect as is the quality of arms produced.

I don't think the Russkies are our biggest problem (160 million, or less, we have double that), but the Chinese have FIVE TIMES our population, the heavy majority male, and could invade through Mexico: I think they are the only population that could. It is true the Chinese can't feed themselves, but getting rid of a lot of mouths at war and taking over a rich agricultural country would help that and be a lot of incentive.

I'm more concerned about Pakistan than about Russia: Pakistan has more people. And they are Muslim, determined fighters, as we know.

Well, I know there is sure to be war soon somewhere, there always is, Mattis is right about that. It will probably break out over something unexpected, as so often. And we will probably not fight well and not win, as so often. We live in a divided country: half of the citizens will certainly side with the enemy.

We haven't taken the gloves off since WWII.

 

[Care4all]

Thank God there's at least one adult in Washington making sure we stay at war forever

this is from the Washington Post

The Washington Compost has zero credibility.

I find it strange that almost nothing that was said in private during the Obama administration ever made it to the media, but we constantly hear about these unsubstantiated discussions that someone overheard during this administration.

Makes me suspect much of it is simply made up.

it's usually released INTENTIONALLY by the whitehouse/Trump or team's direction....

It's a kind of ''polling'' in a sense.... make or create a leak for the press about something that will be controversial, get the public to talk and argue about it, the left wing to point out Trump's hypocrisy which will get the Trumpettes who at one time were against whatever it is, do an about-
face, and defend the President on his about-face.... then the President knows he has your support before he officially announces whatever the reversal of his stance is....

That's simply a tactic used.... not really a real leak, but a strategic leak....

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If we were to take the gloves off we'd make short work of most militaries/countries in the world.
All you really need to do is look at countries from around the world and compare hardware and numbers to the U.S.
Nothing even comes close.

But we don't ever, ever, take the gloves off. Not any more, not since Vietnam, or I should say Korea. (tactical nukes we did not use) I don't think we can: too many leftists are not supporting really anything about the U.S. or the military. They would give the nation to the Chicoms, I think, rather than fighting. And our military knows that and so they never fight to win, and never win.

The Chinese can barely feed themselves and there is no way they could withstand a protracted war.
The Russians I believe would give us a run for our money in the beginning of a war but they dont have near our numbers when it comes to aircraft,carriers and weapons in general.
Their manufacturing base is suspect as is the quality of arms produced.

I don't think the Russkies are our biggest problem (160 million, or less, we have double that), but the Chinese have FIVE TIMES our population, the heavy majority male, and could invade through Mexico: I think they are the only population that could. It is true the Chinese can't feed themselves, but getting rid of a lot of mouths at war and taking over a rich agricultural country would help that and be a lot of incentive.

I'm more concerned about Pakistan than about Russia: Pakistan has more people. And they are Muslim, determined fighters, as we know.

Well, I know there is sure to be war soon somewhere, there always is, Mattis is right about that. It will probably break out over something unexpected, as so often. And we will probably not fight well and not win, as so often. We live in a divided country: half of the citizens will certainly side with the enemy.

We haven't taken the gloves off since WWII.

God help whoever when we do

 

[bodecea]

Already have, snowflake.

I know. That’s why I said “again,” you sick, depraved mutant.

She liked it, apparently...ready for another round.

 

[bodecea]

Already have, snowflake.

I know. That’s why I said “again,” you sick, depraved mutant.

It's really time for you to grow up, old man. Really.

You never uttered a peep as your butt buddy Obungles kept the wars going....you're an old partisan hack. Nothing more and possibly a lot less

Another one mourning OBL.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Already have, snowflake.

I know. That’s why I said “again,” you sick, depraved mutant.

It's really time for you to grow up, old man. Really.

You never uttered a peep as your butt buddy Obungles kept the wars going....you're an old partisan hack. Nothing more and possibly a lot less

Another one mourning OBL.

Gawd just stfu you deluded cow. That was stupid

 

[bodecea]

If we were to take the gloves off we'd make short work of most militaries/countries in the world.
All you really need to do is look at countries from around the world and compare hardware and numbers to the U.S.
Nothing even comes close.

But we don't ever, ever, take the gloves off. Not any more, not since Vietnam, or I should say Korea. (tactical nukes we did not use) I don't think we can: too many leftists are not supporting really anything about the U.S. or the military. They would give the nation to the Chicoms, I think, rather than fighting. And our military knows that and so they never fight to win, and never win.

The Chinese can barely feed themselves and there is no way they could withstand a protracted war.
The Russians I believe would give us a run for our money in the beginning of a war but they dont have near our numbers when it comes to aircraft,carriers and weapons in general.
Their manufacturing base is suspect as is the quality of arms produced.

I don't think the Russkies are our biggest problem (160 million, or less, we have double that), but the Chinese have FIVE TIMES our population, the heavy majority male, and could invade through Mexico: I think they are the only population that could. It is true the Chinese can't feed themselves, but getting rid of a lot of mouths at war and taking over a rich agricultural country would help that and be a lot of incentive.

I'm more concerned about Pakistan than about Russia: Pakistan has more people. And they are Muslim, determined fighters, as we know.

Well, I know there is sure to be war soon somewhere, there always is, Mattis is right about that. It will probably break out over something unexpected, as so often. And we will probably not fight well and not win, as so often. We live in a divided country: half of the citizens will certainly side with the enemy.

We haven't taken the gloves off since WWII.

Because that was the last declared war.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Bode hops from thread to thread hitting funny screaming for attention.

I don't recall her moaning about Ear's wars either. Freaking hack

 

[bodecea]

Already have, snowflake.

I know. That’s why I said “again,” you sick, depraved mutant.

It's really time for you to grow up, old man. Really.

You never uttered a peep as your butt buddy Obungles kept the wars going....you're an old partisan hack. Nothing more and possibly a lot less

Another one mourning OBL.

Gawd just stfu you deluded cow. That was stupid

R u a maude?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Already have, snowflake.

I know. That’s why I said “again,” you sick, depraved mutant.

It's really time for you to grow up, old man. Really.

You never uttered a peep as your butt buddy Obungles kept the wars going....you're an old partisan hack. Nothing more and possibly a lot less

Another one mourning OBL.

Gawd just stfu you deluded cow. That was stupid

R u a maude?

Are you retarded? Learn proper English and grammar.

 

[bodecea]

Bode hops from thread to thread hitting funny screaming for attention.

I don't recall her moaning about Ear's wars either. Freaking hack

And what wars did who have, Bi-Catfish? Speak English, por favor.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Bode hops from thread to thread hitting funny screaming for attention.

I don't recall her moaning about Ear's wars either. Freaking hack

And what wars did who have, Bi-Catfish? Speak English, por favor.

Grow up you deluded bag of dumb fuckery