Donald Trump still more popular than Biden with American.

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,492
Reaction score
17,038
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

1614832834828.png


1614832859240.png


As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
42,087
Reaction score
21,384
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
Who in their right mind would have any respect for this President Dufus? Also known as China Joe.

Everything he has done as President has been wrong. Everything he has said has been an embarrassment.

The only people that like the sonofabitch are the Chinese, Iranians and all those welfare queens flooding across the border. Oh yea, I forgot, and the stupid uneducated Moon Bats that didn't say a damn thing when he stole the election from the American people.
 
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
24,543
Reaction score
20,298
Points
2,415
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Nazi Pelousy didn't pull this stunt when Trump was in office.

She knows Biden is nuts.
 

Paul Essien

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
3,729
Reaction score
1,898
Points
970
basquebromance
if reporters call someone a “white supremacist,” we need to know if the definition of “white supremacist” includes a person who:

Well if racism was burgers, then white supremacy is McDonalds. White supremacy is simply the most powerful form of racism on this planet at this time as we know it.

Racism is like the generic product name, while white supremacy is the leading brand, with far and away the greatest market share.

Other forms of racism could exist at various times and in various places, but none have ever been as effective and widespread in their impact as white supremacy, nor is it likely that any such systems might develop in the foreseeable future.

basquebromance
— questions race preferences in hiring and college admissions;

OK. Name them

Name the colleges were they are allowing all these underserving dumb black people

Name them companies where they are rolling out the red carpet to hire all these unqualified black people

basquebromance
— believes most people are in prison because they committed crimes

The problem it's impossible to know how much crime is committed in America

All you know is the number of arrests and convictions.

That's were context comes in. So if we have law enforcement brimming with white supremacists who is gonna to be arrested more ? Charged more ?

We also cannot get statistics on which of the convicted people are guilty. We can only have the opinion of the court system as to their guilt and that opinion assumes guilt from the fact of conviction. Even if all convicted persons are guilty that does not mean that their sentences are fair. Longer sentences for black people will make the prison system majority black.

basquebromance
— admires Western culture.

What do you mean "western culture" ? Stop with this vague sh*t. Man up. You admire white people inventions ? What do you mean ? Be specific
 
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
24,543
Reaction score
20,298
Points
2,415
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
1614870021807.png
 

jknowgood

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
38,732
Reaction score
10,247
Points
1,330
Location
South carolina
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Yes Democrats tried it on republican presidents, but no Democrat. Why was Biden cut off as soon as he said he would take questions. That has never happened before. Lol
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,492
Reaction score
17,038
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Yes Democrats tried it on republican presidents, but no Democrat. Why was Biden cut off as soon as he said he would take questions. That has never happened before. Lol
Huh?
 

jknowgood

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
38,732
Reaction score
10,247
Points
1,330
Location
South carolina
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Yes Democrats tried it on republican presidents, but no Democrat. Why was Biden cut off as soon as he said he would take questions. That has never happened before. Lol
Huh?
You boy cannot take a question unless he already knows what it is. He is demented.
 
OP
Nostra

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
24,543
Reaction score
20,298
Points
2,415
Veggie Joe has more loose screws than a hardware store in an earthquake.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
39,851
Reaction score
13,828
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA
basquebromance
if reporters call someone a “white supremacist,” we need to know if the definition of “white supremacist” includes a person who:

Well if racism was burgers, then white supremacy is McDonalds. White supremacy is simply the most powerful form of racism on this planet at this time as we know it.

Racism is like the generic product name, while white supremacy is the leading brand, with far and away the greatest market share.

Other forms of racism could exist at various times and in various places, but none have ever been as effective and widespread in their impact as white supremacy, nor is it likely that any such systems might develop in the foreseeable future.

basquebromance
— questions race preferences in hiring and college admissions;

OK. Name them

Name the colleges were they are allowing all these underserving dumb black people

Name them companies where they are rolling out the red carpet to hire all these unqualified black people

basquebromance
— believes most people are in prison because they committed crimes

The problem it's impossible to know how much crime is committed in America

All you know is the number of arrests and convictions.

That's were context comes in. So if we have law enforcement brimming with white supremacists who is gonna to be arrested more ? Charged more ?

We also cannot get statistics on which of the convicted people are guilty. We can only have the opinion of the court system as to their guilt and that opinion assumes guilt from the fact of conviction. Even if all convicted persons are guilty that does not mean that their sentences are fair. Longer sentences for black people will make the prison system majority black.

basquebromance
— admires Western culture.

What do you mean "western culture" ? Stop with this vague sh*t. Man up. You admire white people inventions ? What do you mean ? Be specific
Paul Victim, you are still around I see? How have you been? We are all people.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,555
Reaction score
28,779
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
306-232
Bidens' your daddy
He's her daddy too.
And your blob wanting to nail his own daughter is cool with you.

He said so himself. No need for me to make things up.

Good to see you constantly think about sex with minors though. Not surprising at all
Horseshit.

The big smear seems to be your stock in trade.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,492
Reaction score
17,038
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Yes Democrats tried it on republican presidents, but no Democrat. Why was Biden cut off as soon as he said he would take questions. That has never happened before. Lol
Huh?
You boy cannot take a question unless he already knows what it is. He is demented.
I guess at at some point he will have someone wrestle a microphone away from a reporter like your blob did. LOL.

306-232. Scoreboard.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
75,492
Reaction score
17,038
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
306-232
Bidens' your daddy
He's her daddy too.
And your blob wanting to nail his own daughter is cool with you.

He said so himself. No need for me to make things up.

Good to see you constantly think about sex with minors though. Not surprising at all
Horseshit.

The big smear seems to be your stock in trade.
He said he'd be dating his daughter. You support Trump..you support someone who wants to commit incest.

Sorry.
 

Sandy Shanks

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2018
Messages
2,003
Reaction score
552
Points
210
Today the capital is on high alert, and, thanks to our former President and his terrorist allies, it will remain so in the coming months. The capitol edifice was once a tourist attraction. Today it is a fenced-in fortress with armed troops at the ready.

The BBC reports, "Security has been ramped up at the US Capitol in Washington in response to "a possible plot to breach" the building.

"The move was prompted by intelligence that a militia group planned the attack for 4 March - the day conspiracy theorist group QAnon believes Donald Trump will return for a second term.

"A mob loyal to Mr Trump stormed the Congress building in January."

As one Republican lawmaker said, Trump could have put an end to this by simply telling his overly enthusiastic supporters to stand down.

Instead, on cue and Trump being his usual sociopathic self made matters worse by doubling down on the lie that it all.

The former president, who remains permanently banned from Twitter, released a statement Thursday once again raging against Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), blasting him as the "most unpopular politician in the country" while blaming him for Republicans' Senate losses in Georgia — losses for which Trump himself has been blamed by other Republicans.

Trump inadvertently boosts Biden's stimulus messaging with another statement raging against McConnell

The vast majority of Republican lawmakers in Congress agree. Donald J. Trump is the titular leader of the Republican Party.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
137,555
Reaction score
28,779
Points
2,180
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
306-232
Bidens' your daddy
He's her daddy too.
And your blob wanting to nail his own daughter is cool with you.

He said so himself. No need for me to make things up.

Good to see you constantly think about sex with minors though. Not surprising at all
Horseshit.

The big smear seems to be your stock in trade.
He said he'd be dating his daughter.

Sorry.
"If he wasn't her farther," you fucking NAZI douchebag liar.

Why do you imagine anyone believes your horseshit?
 

jknowgood

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2010
Messages
38,732
Reaction score
10,247
Points
1,330
Location
South carolina
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
The Vegetable can't even read from a teleprompter for 20 seconds without forgetting where he is.
306-232
Scoreboard.
Shameless.
After over a month Biden's inauguration only has 16k likes and 90K dislikes?

View attachment 463555
BDS!
How can you have bds with a shell of a moron? Biden is a demented fool.
More pure BDS!
View attachment 463622
Erasing the blob's legacy one uneventful day at a time.

Persons being vaccinated is way ahead of schedule thanks to Joe...the relief bill is progressing through Congress nicely, we're once again joining our allies instead of picking fights with them...and you blob is relegated to the back pages of the news.

Joe is doing a great job.
People were being vaccinated more quickly under Trump.
Factually incorrect.
Biden on his first day got Canada wanting to put sanctions on us.
Try again slingblade. LOL
Biden is a laughing stock. He cannot even hold a press conference.
Meanwhile back in reality; he did a town hall that was televised, took questions, etc...
What, did they ask him if he got his pudding pop yet?
You sound like you need a nap...you keep making these silly accusations then when they are proven wrong, you say something ignorant.
Poor illegitimate dementia pedo Joe.
I guess you're tired of getting creamed on the topic you tried to introduce. I can't blame you. Your ass has been kicked so often, you now have to shit via your mouth.
You couldn't kick yourself out of a wet paper bag. Joe is demented and is proving to be worse than Obama. Even leaders in your own party wants to take the nuclear codes from him.
306-232. Scoreboard.
So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?
Wow this is out of left field and further derails your thread. I see you're changing the subject yet again....I guess you're finally learning your lesson. You've been taught enough of them. LOL.

But lets go there!

As with almost all things, there are nuances to this.

Your question is: "So you're good with leaders of your party wanting your guy Biden stripped from the nuclear codes?".

A). That isn't what the letter said at all. The President would have the sole authority to instigate a launch.
B). What the letter did say was that those who signed off on it wanted to strip the President from being able to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons. The decision to launch would still be her or his...he can't be over-ruled. But his decision would have to be seconded by someone. As I recall, the letter presented four options.

View attachment 463943

View attachment 463944

As far as the options presented above, for a first strike ONLY, #1 and #3 are the ones I'd endorse. Number two is nonsense. As we saw with your blob, we often had "acting" secretaries of defense, state, treasury, CIA, etc... The only federal official he didn't fire was the guy who changes the lightbulbs in the guard shack. So #2 is not a workable solution; a blob-like President would just keep firing anyone who disagreed with him and replace them with someone who would agree to fire the nukes. #4 would be okay but it would depend on who sits on the council. But if you're going to empanel a council; why not go with #3 and get Congress to declare war before we launch weapons? Also, you have to worry about the talent of the people in those positions.

Again, all of that is nuanced commentary regarding a first-strike. To answer you question, I'm elated by it. No President should be able to guarantee the end of the world. I think a similar letter should be sent regarding the presidential pardon as well--stripping the office of the power to pardon. Put it in the hands of a 3 judge panel. We need the pardon; Presidents from both major parties have turned it into a reward for patronage instead of an eraser.

If the question is to put limits on the President in terms of a retaliating, I'm less in favor of that but at the end of the day, I'm okay with her/him keeping the power to unilaterally launching our nukes. The letter is not clear if they are talking about launching in all cases or just first strikes. So again, Yes to stripping the power of a first strike and No to stripping the power of a retaliation.

The reasons I'm not super excited about it is because of two considerations

The idea that we have to launch immediately is pretty silly. We have 18 Ohio Class Subs--one or two under the ice cap at any time--that can rain nukes down on much of the earth. The idea that the ICBMs that are incoming will take away our launch capability is false. On top of the subs, SAC has dozens of B52's, B-1, and B-2s that can carry nuke payloads. If we can get them airborne fast enough is a question but we train to launch them pretty quickly. I get the reason people would want to launch immediately but the NEED to do so is non-existent.

Also, the cartoonish version that we've been fed of a giant screen at NORAD tracking incoming ICBMs is likely not the way it's going to work. Any nation rich enough to have a nuke arsenal is sophisticated enough to know that they will be reduced to nothing in short order if they launch. So state actors are most likely off the list of suspects who are going to start a nuke war.

As far as the nukes themselves go....Here is how we will be hit one day:

1. Terrorists/Rogue commanders take over a nuke site somewhere and launch. Unlikely but more likely than an elected head of state pushing the button
2. Terrorists/Rogue commanders acquire a nuke and a launcher and take out an ally of ours. Do we respond if ISIS takes out Milan? Interesting question. Again, this is unlikely but more likely than a head of state pushing the button.
3. This is the most likely scenario...the nuke in one of the bajillion containers we offload daily at our ports. It goes off in Houston or Jacksonville or Miami. What then? It's unknown where the container came from--investigating it would rather difficult. If it's a terrorist who is now in, lets say, Cairo...do we nuke Cairo to "get even" with the leader of the group?

All in all, the nukes we have are a useless weapon. Even if we did decide that we are going to "get even" with the dude in Cairo and spin up the USS Georgia to launch it's arsenal....when Russia and China see it on their defense screens picked up by their satellites...what do they do? Are they going to wait until the missiles land before they launch their birds? I doubt it. Our retaliation would likely mean complete destruction.
Yes Democrats tried it on republican presidents, but no Democrat. Why was Biden cut off as soon as he said he would take questions. That has never happened before. Lol
Huh?
You boy cannot take a question unless he already knows what it is. He is demented.
I guess at at some point he will have someone wrestle a microphone away from a reporter like your blob did. LOL.

306-232. Scoreboard.
No wrestling, just cut him off. No President in history has been treated this way. Why?
 

LeftofLeft

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2011
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
5,873
Points
390
Donald Trump still more popular than Biden with American.
LIAR! Even Pelosi has a higher favorability rating than lying traitor Tramp!!!!!
Favorability Ratings: U.S. Political Leaders
Can you explain how those polls were taken?
They are from the extreme Right-wing Real Clear Politics site, so you know the favor the GOPQ.
That does not explain how the polls were taken. The Rhinos don't like Trump either and wanted him out. Just ask Cheney's daughter, the daughter of a war criminal.
Who are you calling a war criminal? Cheney re-built America’s depleted intelligence infrastructure. Obama should thank him since he inherited it. Or, a simple “He built that” would be appreciated.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top