Trumped

[Spirit]

I think Red just said that Trump isn't a pussy like the previous administration.

 

 

 

[arch stanton]

19 minutes ago, Geoff said:

I think Red just said that Trump isn't a pussy like the previous administration.

 

 

 

Or, he said he thinks Trump is less discerning about who gets blown to bits

[UndertheHalo]

i actually read that 

38 minutes ago, Geoff said:

I think Red just said that Trump isn't a pussy like the previous administration.

 

 

 

yea man, you've gotta be such a big bad dude to order other people go into combat and drop bombs.  Thank god Trump is so tough.

Edited April 14, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[Crampknees]

MAGA MAN's MOAB MOFO's

[Jason]

10 minutes ago, colt4405 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-government-asks-public-departments-ax-233240378.html

Holy shit people are stupid.

 

I would vote for most departments

[Jay]

DHU or DHH, tough call. Let the people decide!

 

[Amazing Larry]

25 minutes ago, colt4405 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-government-asks-public-departments-ax-233240378.html

Holy shit people are stupid.

There are a number of agencies on this list that I would want to reduce or eliminate. 

[Lou]

20 minutes ago, colt4405 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-government-asks-public-departments-ax-233240378.html

Holy shit people are stupid.

 

are you kidding me?!  make it a reality show and it would be the top-ranked show ever  - only because i can't get the green light for my 10 death row inmates cage match - losers die, winner gets released. the only weapons available are plastic sporks.  but i digress...they could do eliminations once a month as to which department is axed. employees are required to be on air as their future is decided by the citizens of this great nation.  they could also set it up where if the deptt that loses receives XX% of the votes, they get to keep that many employees. The boss has to decide right then, on air, who gets fired.

damn, now i'm bummed that it isn't t actually going to be a show..

thanks for nothing...

[Jay]

I like it... everyone fills out a bracket (it might be difficult to decide the seeds but anyway), and the worst department moves on to the next round...

 

[red321]

[Thomas]

The optimist in me: Displays of force are nearly meaningless without a belief that there is a willingness to use them. Both Trump's allies and most ardent opponents would agree that there is certainly more willingness to use them.  Perhaps this will have a positive effect on diplomacy with regimes such as Best Korea.

The pessimist would point out that this is how wars are started.

[Jason]

46 minutes ago, Lawrence said:

There are a number of agencies on this list that I would want to reduce or eliminate. 

It's funny when I talk to people and I tell them that the Dept. of Education should be eliminated. They look at me like I'm crazy or something.

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, Jason said:

It's funny when I talk to people and I tell them that the Dept. of Education should be eliminated. They look at me like I'm crazy or something.

It would help your argument and reduce the concerns about your mental health if you were wearing pants while talking about politics in public.

[Jason]

15 minutes ago, Thomas said:

It would help your argument and reduce the concerns about your mental health if you were wearing pants while talking about politics in public.

I'm pretty impressive without my pants on.

[mtangelsfan]

23 minutes ago, Thomas said:

The optimist in me: Displays of force are nearly meaningless without a belief that there is a willingness to use them. Both Trump's allies and most ardent opponents would agree that there is certainly more willingness to use them.  Perhaps this will have a positive effect on diplomacy with regimes such as Best Korea.

The pessimist would point out that this is how wars are started.

I don't understand this move by the U.S.  China has a bunch of military on the N.K. border, why aren't we letting them deal with it?

My other concern is that if we do some kind of strike against them it will be S.K. and Japan that suffer the consequences.  That would be extremely sad and reckless.

[Jason]

1 minute ago, mtangelsfan said:

I don't understand this move by the U.S.  China has a bunch of military on the N.K. border, why are we letting them deal with it?

My other concern is that if we do some kind of strike against them it will be S.K. and Japan that suffer the consequences.  That would be extremely sad and reckless.

I'm not sure why Japan isn't being a little more vocal about NK. They are definitely in striking range and should be concerned about NK nuke capabilities 

[Thomas]

6 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I don't understand this move by the U.S.  China has a bunch of military on the N.K. border, why aren't we letting them deal with it?

My other concern is that if we do some kind of strike against them it will be S.K. and Japan that suffer the consequences.  That would be extremely sad and reckless.

China has no interest in invading NK. Why would they? They are happiest when everyone stays on their side of the border. Their troops are there in case shit goes down and the literal peasants try to escape into China. If American troops get too cozy the number of troops will increase ten-fold.

[mtangelsfan]

I wasn't thinking they would invade, just a show of force.  Let that show of force sink in.

[Thomas]

7 minutes ago, Jason said:

I'm not sure why Japan isn't being a little more vocal about NK. They are definitely in striking range and should be concerned about NK nuke capabilities 

I'm sure they are internally but even Japan is self aware enough to know that them talking about anything remotely militarily regarding Korea is not going to be taken well.

[Thomas]

1 minute ago, mtangelsfan said:

I wasn't thinking they would invade, just a show of force.  Let that show of force sink in.

I don't think it would particularly faze them. They know the Chinese leadership would be loathe to actually do anything.

[Crampknees]

16 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I don't understand this move by the U.S.  China has a bunch of military on the N.K. border, why aren't we letting them deal with it?

My other concern is that if we do some kind of strike against them it will be S.K. and Japan that suffer the consequences.  That would be extremely sad and reckless.

 

He quits tweeting how bad ass he is(Remember he just declared it is his military like he is playing with his toy soldiers) and shuts up China may be able to deal with it.  A delusional man-child hitting the hornet's nest of a delusional man-child.

Or we could just nuke the shit out of everything and let God sort it out.  

[mtangelsfan]

5 minutes ago, Thomas said:

I don't think it would particularly faze them. They know the Chinese leadership would be loathe to actually do anything.

The Chinese economy would take a giant hit if something over there happened.  That is enough for them to deal with their ugly step-brother.

[Adam]

20 minutes ago, Jason said:

I'm not sure why Japan isn't being a little more vocal about NK. They are definitely in striking range and should be concerned about NK nuke capabilities 

They're busy doing karaoke and filing auto claims

[Thomas]

5 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

The Chinese economy would take a giant hit if something over there happened.  That is enough for them to deal with their ugly step-brother.

How would the Chinese economy not be dealt a similar if not a considerably worse blow if they had to use force against their neighbor? Let alone having to deal with the nuclear considerations. There is only so much China can do diplomatically. Militarily NK will call their bluff every time.

[Thomas]

10 minutes ago, Kurt Swanson said:

A delusional man-child hitting the hornet's nest of a delusional man-child.

If we're lucky this prospect will force China to go considerably beyond their comfort zone to calm down the situation. I wouldn't count on it though.