Jump to content
The Political Lounge

Your Forum Cabinet


Dobs

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Mishfox said:

Realistic is when the United States bombs the Middle East 😂

Sigh

Another “moderate” Biden voter

How about when Russia bombs us when you get rid of our military? Or China invades South Korea and Taiwan? Everything has consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dobs said:

Bud what do you think is going to occur to all the current veterans. They’ll wither away due to the nations total lack of defense?

In my America everything will be provided for by the government through taxes on the rich. Veterans won’t need the paltry sums the government currently gives them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Patine said:

See, the standing, automatic, mandated viewpoint that this situation - and others - REQUIRE, unconditionally, a direct military response by a big, overbloated, over-funded (but underachieving, having only won two wars since the end of WW2 - the only two where they actually used, and didn't ignore, the formula modern great powers wars at all with, nowadays), including charging headfirst, potentially direct conflicts with China or Russia - extinction events for the human species, in the end. The, "Globocop," self-proclaimed mandate of the U.S. and many of it's Western allies is mostly the same attitude as the Crusader Kingdoms or the White Man's Burden, just framed differently and with different specific objectives and viewpoints, but the same overarcing, core mentality. WW2 was the LAST war, to date, fought by the main Western Powers that was needed or justified to be fought as such. Though national defense - in the REAL definition of the word (defense of your own sovereign territory against invasion) is perfectly justified, and outright demanded, by ANY nation, military interventionism and adventurism by the Western Powers, as well as the USSR/Russia and China, is nothing but one war crime and atrocity after another in the Post-WW2 era.

An invasion of an ally is justified to have a response. That's how it goes.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mishfox said:

In my America everything will be provided for by the government through taxes on the rich. Veterans won’t need the paltry sums the government currently gives them.

Good luck with that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I personally don't think a U.S. ally is worth the extinction of humanity and the destruction of the world. Anyone in Government who sincerely does should be forcibly removed from power and pre-emptively tried for the genocide of seven billion people.

So if China decides to March into Taiwan, kill a bunch of civilians and their government, you're fine with sitting by? Shame. I dont want the world to get to the point of extinction but an ally is an ally. Especially Taiwan. China is an authoritarian dictatorship. Get your priorities straight.

Thankfully China isnt dumb enough to ever try this in my opinion. Despite the chess game going back and forth, at the end of the day we both want to live.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mishfox said:

The government will provide the food, liberal 😂

Where does the government get the food from? Soylent Green? 😛

Edited by Pringles
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Patine said:

I personally don't think a U.S. ally is worth the extinction of humanity and the destruction of the world. Anyone in Government who sincerely does should be forcibly removed from power and pre-emptively tried for the genocide of seven billion people.

Then China shouldnt invade South Korea. The alliance specifically states that the US will come to the Republic of Koreas defense. That is on them, not us at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Patine said:

Such twisted logic. These, "alliances," are why the assassination of Franz Ferdinand turned from a dispute between Austria-Hungary and Serbia to the most nightmarish war in history.

South Korea is a valuable and trusted friend. The onus is on the invader, not the invadee. I would say your logic is the one that is twisted.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

What about some of the recent plans to invade or intervene in North Korea by the U.S. in the last or so. Why was there rhetoric not speaking of de facto declaring war on Russia and China, and that human extinction was recognized as a very real possibility. That element of the affair was completely absent from any of the talk. But wouldn't such a proxy declaration of war have to acknowledged there, too?

Has the U.S. invaded North Korea? Oh, no, I thought I had missed something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mishfox said:

From the wealthy restaurants and supermarkets who throw out most of their product

And where do they get their food from? What happens when it runs out? 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Patine said:

No, I was referring to talk at several points in the last decade or so of a potential U.S. invasion of, or intervention in, North Korea for various reasons proposed. I thought I made that clear in the first line of my post above, which makes your response a bit confusing.

There are tons of plans created by the government and Pentagon officials that are there *in case they are needed*. Not every plan is made with the intent of actually putting it into motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...