Whenever America Wins, Democrats Lose

[Taz]

Trump lost nothing. NK lost with increased sanctions.

Kim played Trump and gets to keep his nukes.

Trump lost nothing. Unlike Democrats who handed cash to NK.

Trump lost face, and lost a deal to get NK to stop making nukes.

Trump couldn't make a deal with a starving nation. Deal with it.

That’s well beyond stupid to believe fat man Kim cares if North Koreans starve.

I'm saying they're starving, so should be ready to make a deal bigtime... for food. But I didn't expect you to get it. Numpty.

 

[Maxdeath]

No I asked you a legitimate question. If Trump got played then what exactly did giving NK two nuclear reactors mean?
Does anyone seriously believe that China can afford to be hurt by tariffs by the largest consumer nation in the world? Come on be serious.

In a trade war, all citizens lose. On both sides. It's a dumb way to fight.

You still have not answered the question about the two nuclear reactors.
Maybe we should have sent Dennis Rodman since it is so important.

I guess we could always resort to an agreement nvasion or a nuclear war. To straighten out trade. Seems to be what some are hoping for.

The only way to deal with China is to block ALL their crap from entering the US. Charging Americans more for Chinese stuff won't get it done.

Giving reactors way back when has no bearing to Trump not getting a deal done like he boasted he would. Please try again.

Got to love crazy. Back then it was yeah we won. Now instead of admitting it was an utter and abysmal failure it has no bearing. But not getting a deal in one or two talks is a complete disaster. I guess you don’t mind being a joke.

So the idea is to make 90% of the US mad and upset that they can’t buy junk. To put things out of the market and punish companies that require parts from overseas? That really sounds like the way to start a revolt more then a winning strategy. Might have worked many years ago before manufacturing moved out but not any more.

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

 

[Taz]

In a trade war, all citizens lose. On both sides. It's a dumb way to fight.

You still have not answered the question about the two nuclear reactors.
Maybe we should have sent Dennis Rodman since it is so important.

I guess we could always resort to an agreement nvasion or a nuclear war. To straighten out trade. Seems to be what some are hoping for.

The only way to deal with China is to block ALL their crap from entering the US. Charging Americans more for Chinese stuff won't get it done.

Giving reactors way back when has no bearing to Trump not getting a deal done like he boasted he would. Please try again.

Got to love crazy. Back then it was yeah we won. Now instead of admitting it was an utter and abysmal failure it has no bearing. But not getting a deal in one or two talks is a complete disaster. I guess you don’t mind being a joke.

So the idea is to make 90% of the US mad and upset that they can’t buy junk. To put things out of the market and punish companies that require parts from overseas? That really sounds like the way to start a revolt more then a winning strategy. Might have worked many years ago before manufacturing moved out but not any more.

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well let's see Trump had two meetings with Kim how many meetings have other presidents had with him?
How many meetings were involved in the Russia SALT talks? How many meetings were involved in 44 Iran deal that he was so proud of that he would not allow congress to ratify?

Nice that we did not have to start a war. There are so many that are pinning their hopes on one so they can point and say see how bad he is.
Now all we need is Trump to win the election and China will have to fold. They can't stand there ground longer then the next election.

So what if Trump had meetings, he got played by Kim.

China only folds in your wet dreams.

Love your debate skills. Why not just call everyone a poopiehead it would take less typing and would convey the same amount of information and thought.

China isn't going to fold, only a poopiehead would think that. Try backing up your comment with some facts as to why China would fold.
And Kim won the meetings and gets to keep his nukes.

What's not to love about NK? No carbon emissions, no guns, everyone is equal, it's a Progressive Paradise! Finally!

Trump is just jealous that everyone here isn't forced to call him Dear Leader also.

Trump is the greatest American President since Reagan. Reagan crushed the USSR, Trump will crush Soros's Progressive Fascist Zombie democrat Party

 

[Taz]

So what if Trump had meetings, he got played by Kim.

China only folds in your wet dreams.

Love your debate skills. Why not just call everyone a poopiehead it would take less typing and would convey the same amount of information and thought.

China isn't going to fold, only a poopiehead would think that. Try backing up your comment with some facts as to why China would fold.
And Kim won the meetings and gets to keep his nukes.

What's not to love about NK? No carbon emissions, no guns, everyone is equal, it's a Progressive Paradise! Finally!

Trump is just jealous that everyone here isn't forced to call him Dear Leader also.

Trump is the greatest American President since Reagan. Reagan crushed the USSR, Trump will crush Soros's Progressive Fascist Zombie democrat Party

Although I have agreed with some of his policies, Trump is an ignorant asshole. Fo' shizzle!

 

[Maxdeath]

You still have not answered the question about the two nuclear reactors.
Maybe we should have sent Dennis Rodman since it is so important.

I guess we could always resort to an agreement nvasion or a nuclear war. To straighten out trade. Seems to be what some are hoping for.

The only way to deal with China is to block ALL their crap from entering the US. Charging Americans more for Chinese stuff won't get it done.

Giving reactors way back when has no bearing to Trump not getting a deal done like he boasted he would. Please try again.

Got to love crazy. Back then it was yeah we won. Now instead of admitting it was an utter and abysmal failure it has no bearing. But not getting a deal in one or two talks is a complete disaster. I guess you don’t mind being a joke.

So the idea is to make 90% of the US mad and upset that they can’t buy junk. To put things out of the market and punish companies that require parts from overseas? That really sounds like the way to start a revolt more then a winning strategy. Might have worked many years ago before manufacturing moved out but not any more.

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

 

[Taz]

The only way to deal with China is to block ALL their crap from entering the US. Charging Americans more for Chinese stuff won't get it done.

Giving reactors way back when has no bearing to Trump not getting a deal done like he boasted he would. Please try again.

Got to love crazy. Back then it was yeah we won. Now instead of admitting it was an utter and abysmal failure it has no bearing. But not getting a deal in one or two talks is a complete disaster. I guess you don’t mind being a joke.

So the idea is to make 90% of the US mad and upset that they can’t buy junk. To put things out of the market and punish companies that require parts from overseas? That really sounds like the way to start a revolt more then a winning strategy. Might have worked many years ago before manufacturing moved out but not any more.

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

 

[Maxdeath]

Got to love crazy. Back then it was yeah we won. Now instead of admitting it was an utter and abysmal failure it has no bearing. But not getting a deal in one or two talks is a complete disaster. I guess you don’t mind being a joke.

So the idea is to make 90% of the US mad and upset that they can’t buy junk. To put things out of the market and punish companies that require parts from overseas? That really sounds like the way to start a revolt more then a winning strategy. Might have worked many years ago before manufacturing moved out but not any more.

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

So of course we should never try and reduce nuclear arsenals. We should just stockpile more and more. We should create more and more tension. Until we or some other country feels a need to resort to nuclear war.

We should never ever try to reduce the number of nuclear arms. We should never try to resolve things peacefully. Right!!

Funny how many seemed to think the Iran deal was not dumb. How many do you think applauded the SALT agreement? Perhaps you need to rethink your idea on cheering for a nuclear war.

 

[Godboy]

I hope this deal is better than the non-deal for nukes with North Korea.

Well let's see Trump had two meetings with Kim how many meetings have other presidents had with him?
How many meetings were involved in the Russia SALT talks? How many meetings were involved in 44 Iran deal that he was so proud of that he would not allow congress to ratify?

Nice that we did not have to start a war. There are so many that are pinning their hopes on one so they can point and say see how bad he is.
Now all we need is Trump to win the election and China will have to fold. They can't stand there ground longer then the next election.

So what if Trump had meetings, he got played by Kim.

China only folds in your wet dreams.

Played? Do you see any long range missile tests taking place? Are they shooting rockets over SK? Are they shooting rockets into Japans territory? That shit was happening every week when Obama was in charge.

 

[Taz]

Whatever mistakes were made, Trump still didn't get his job done.

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

So of course we should never try and reduce nuclear arsenals. We should just stockpile more and more. We should create more and more tension. Until we or some other country feels a need to resort to nuclear war.

We should never ever try to reduce the number of nuclear arms. We should never try to resolve things peacefully. Right!!

Funny how many seemed to think the Iran deal was not dumb. How many do you think applauded the SALT agreement? Perhaps you need to rethink your idea on cheering for a nuclear war.

We don't reduce our nuke arsenal, why should others? Especially when you consider that the US has never attacked a nuclear power, it would make sense for other nations to get nukes.

 

[Taz]

I hope this deal is better than the non-deal for nukes with North Korea.

Well let's see Trump had two meetings with Kim how many meetings have other presidents had with him?
How many meetings were involved in the Russia SALT talks? How many meetings were involved in 44 Iran deal that he was so proud of that he would not allow congress to ratify?

Nice that we did not have to start a war. There are so many that are pinning their hopes on one so they can point and say see how bad he is.
Now all we need is Trump to win the election and China will have to fold. They can't stand there ground longer then the next election.

So what if Trump had meetings, he got played by Kim.

China only folds in your wet dreams.

Played? Do you see any long range missile tests taking place? Are they shooting rockets over SK? Are they shooting rockets into Japans territory? That shit was happening every week when Obama was in charge.

They are still developing more nukes and missiles. Oper your eyes.

 

[Maxdeath]

So according to you the US has never had a successful negotiation. Since there has never been one in only two meetings. And both Clinton and 44 were complete losers since both gave things away without a win.
Well at least we agree on both them being terrible.

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

So of course we should never try and reduce nuclear arsenals. We should just stockpile more and more. We should create more and more tension. Until we or some other country feels a need to resort to nuclear war.

We should never ever try to reduce the number of nuclear arms. We should never try to resolve things peacefully. Right!!

Funny how many seemed to think the Iran deal was not dumb. How many do you think applauded the SALT agreement? Perhaps you need to rethink your idea on cheering for a nuclear war.

We don't reduce our nuke arsenal, why should others? Especially when you consider that the US has never attacked a nuclear power, it would make sense for other nations to get nukes.

Sure SALT never did anything. Rrright!!
Sure Iran, Iraq,Cambodia, and all the others should have nuclear weapons. Might as well give Isis and others nuclear weapons. While we are at it open our armory to anyone that wants tactical nukes.
Believe me I understand that you want a nuclear war. You think that somehow you will survive. Then you can have your perfect world.

Funny how you went from Trump was a failure for not getting NK to abandon their nukes to anyone that wants them should have them. Let's see who pushes the button first.

I doubt you understand that having some holding others in check because of the mutually assured destruction can only work as long as it is not every nation, every despot.

 

[Taz]

We should just ignore NK, I don't get why we care so much. They have nothing that can hurt us.

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

So of course we should never try and reduce nuclear arsenals. We should just stockpile more and more. We should create more and more tension. Until we or some other country feels a need to resort to nuclear war.

We should never ever try to reduce the number of nuclear arms. We should never try to resolve things peacefully. Right!!

Funny how many seemed to think the Iran deal was not dumb. How many do you think applauded the SALT agreement? Perhaps you need to rethink your idea on cheering for a nuclear war.

We don't reduce our nuke arsenal, why should others? Especially when you consider that the US has never attacked a nuclear power, it would make sense for other nations to get nukes.

Sure SALT never did anything. Rrright!!
Sure Iran, Iraq,Cambodia, and all the others should have nuclear weapons. Might as well give Isis and others nuclear weapons. While we are at it open our armory to anyone that wants tactical nukes.
Believe me I understand that you want a nuclear war. You think that somehow you will survive. Then you can have your perfect world.

Funny how you went from Trump was a failure for not getting NK to abandon their nukes to anyone that wants them should have them. Let's see who pushes the button first.

I doubt you understand that having some holding others in check because of the mutually assured destruction can only work as long as it is not every nation, every despot.

SALT let both sides keep their nuclear arsenals. Some deal!

I never said to give them the weapons, but eventually, everyone who wants nukes will be able to get them for some country that is friendly to them, or make them themselves

Trump boasted about how he was going to make a great deal with NK when we all knew he'd get nothing. Is that the Art of the Deal?

 

[Godboy]

I hope this deal is better than the non-deal for nukes with North Korea.

Well let's see Trump had two meetings with Kim how many meetings have other presidents had with him?
How many meetings were involved in the Russia SALT talks? How many meetings were involved in 44 Iran deal that he was so proud of that he would not allow congress to ratify?

Nice that we did not have to start a war. There are so many that are pinning their hopes on one so they can point and say see how bad he is.
Now all we need is Trump to win the election and China will have to fold. They can't stand there ground longer then the next election.

So what if Trump had meetings, he got played by Kim.

China only folds in your wet dreams.

Played? Do you see any long range missile tests taking place? Are they shooting rockets over SK? Are they shooting rockets into Japans territory? That shit was happening every week when Obama was in charge.

They are still developing more nukes and missiles. Oper your eyes.

Are they? I havent been over there, so i wouldnt know. What did you see over there?

 

[Maxdeath]

Well let's look at that. There are claims they have/had long range missles.
They have been known to be trading with Iran. My question has always been what does NK have that Iran would need? Can't be food as NK can't feed their own. Can't be oil. Could it possibly be something to due with nuclear warheads or missles? That is probably the only thing that makes sense.

Why not try to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world peacefully instead of doing it in one massive war? Even if I am not around to see either one I vote for doing it peacefully. Who knows it may not happen in a year, ten or ever but I don't think it hurts to try. Expecting it to happen with one, two or seven talks especially when distrust is so deeply ingrained is pure fallacy.

Expecting others to give up their nukes when we get to keep ours is dumb.

So of course we should never try and reduce nuclear arsenals. We should just stockpile more and more. We should create more and more tension. Until we or some other country feels a need to resort to nuclear war.

We should never ever try to reduce the number of nuclear arms. We should never try to resolve things peacefully. Right!!

Funny how many seemed to think the Iran deal was not dumb. How many do you think applauded the SALT agreement? Perhaps you need to rethink your idea on cheering for a nuclear war.

We don't reduce our nuke arsenal, why should others? Especially when you consider that the US has never attacked a nuclear power, it would make sense for other nations to get nukes.

Sure SALT never did anything. Rrright!!
Sure Iran, Iraq,Cambodia, and all the others should have nuclear weapons. Might as well give Isis and others nuclear weapons. While we are at it open our armory to anyone that wants tactical nukes.
Believe me I understand that you want a nuclear war. You think that somehow you will survive. Then you can have your perfect world.

Funny how you went from Trump was a failure for not getting NK to abandon their nukes to anyone that wants them should have them. Let's see who pushes the button first.

I doubt you understand that having some holding others in check because of the mutually assured destruction can only work as long as it is not every nation, every despot.

SALT let both sides keep their nuclear arsenals. Some deal!

I never said to give them the weapons, but eventually, everyone who wants nukes will be able to get them for some country that is friendly to them, or make them themselves

Trump boasted about how he was going to make a great deal with NK when we all knew he'd get nothing. Is that the Art of the Deal?

It was a strategic arms limitation treaty. We reduced the number of nuclear arms in both Russia and theU.S. so yes it was a deal. Learn something.

Part of the reason for certain countries having nukes is the commitment of keeping them safe.

Once again only an idiot or someone who listens to only CNN would believe that it could be done in one or two meetings. Besides I seem to remember 44 boasting that we would all save $2500.00 a year on ACA. He boasted that he had such a good deal with our trading partners it was like the gold standard of deals. Even Hillary finally admitted it wasn't. He made a very bad nuclear deal with Iran and boasted about it. I guess he was not much of a president either. Actually going by his failed boasts he was worse then Trump. But everyone knows that.