GostHacked Posted August 16, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2019 34 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: Wrong again. If you have a strong enough military then you don't get attacked. There are a lot of places that never get attacked and don't even really have a a military. 34 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: Would Iran attack Canada if they were our neighbour instead of the US? Yup. All the women in this country would be wearing hijabs and those of us who didn't convert to islam would be dead or enslaved. Iran has no ability to project their forces as the USA is surrounding them completely. 34 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: If you don't understand these kinds of things that's ok, not everyone does. We'll just take your opinion fwiw. I've heard this from other members. However those members don't post here anymore for whatever reason. BUUUT we are getting off topic now. So we shall stop there and then get back to the candidates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted August 16, 2019 Report Share Posted August 16, 2019 45 minutes ago, GostHacked said: There are a lot of places that never get attacked and don't even really have a a military. I guess that the whole world could just rely on that then, right? Something that has happened once will always happen in the future, right? Good to know. Quote Iran has no ability to project their forces as the USA is surrounding them completely. I guess that you didn't understand the meaning of "if Iran was our neighbour instead of the US"? Quote I've heard this from other members. However those members don't post here anymore for whatever reason. Maybe they couldn't handle swimming in the kiddie pool anymore? It gets exasperating after a while, explaining the exact same things over and over again. Quote BUUUT we are getting off topic now. So we shall stop there and then get back to the candidates. The necessity of military power is quite on topic GH. You probably couldn't be any more on the topic of the US election than weighing the necessity of a military vs dropping military spending entirely just to increase healthcare coverage. You make a good point that maybe 40M people would get better health care coverage in your scenario. So ask yourself, if the US ceases to be a world power would there be 40M casualties? (Hint: before you answer, find out how many of their own people the Chinese government killed between 1940 and 1970) Whatever. Not on topic, right? Hey I'll jump at the chance to hop out of your kiddie pool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 16, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: You make a good point that maybe 40M people would get better health care coverage in your scenario. So ask yourself, if the US ceases to be a world power would there be 40M casualties? (Hint: before you answer, find out how many of their own people the Chinese government killed between 1940 and 1970) Pure hyperbole. What connection are you making to Chinese communism killing people and the USA not giving it's own citizens universal health care? And then connect that to the USA wanting to be a world military power. And you say I don't make any sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCanMan Posted August 16, 2019 Report Share Posted August 16, 2019 51 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Pure hyperbole. What connection are you making to Chinese communism killing people and the USA not giving it's own citizens universal health care? And then connect that to the USA wanting to be a world military power. And you say I don't make any sense. You make sense based on your limited understanding of the world. If you had a conversation with a 4 year old you'd get the same answers. It's cute, it just doesn't work in real life. "Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it." Here's a typical kindergarten/GH sentiment: "If we stopped having soldiers we could have free doctors for everyone!" (sorry kids, history has shown that if you have a problem with paying for an army then you have a problem with being killed, raped, enslaved, etc. Doctors can only save lives when they're protected by soldiers.) "We could solve world hunger if we stopped eating meat and just grew vegetables". (Sorry kids but world hunger is a moving target. If you feed 7B then you eventually have 12B, and you still have world hunger. Sadly, lack of population control = world hunger.) FWIW, you're the one who brought up the subject of making room in the budget for military spending vs healthcare. And yes GH, I make sense, I'm just saying things that you don't understand, or things that you don't want to admit are true. I think I can say something that we can both agree on. There was a character named Q on a Star Trek series and, long story short, he was usually the antagonist but in one episode the Trekkies and Q needed to team up to ensure their mutual survival. The Trekkies offered for him to stay on their ship but "he would have to agree to be bound in a manner that restricted him from being able to wield his immense magic." Q's reply was "Captain Picard, knowing humans as well as you do, would you ever allow yourself to be held powerless by them?" Oh snap. That's a gotcha moment if there ever was one. Right? Surely you must understand then, that opting to not have an army is like allowing yourself to eventually be at the mercy of your enemies? The US is a wealthy country with a lot of natural resources and beautiful places to live. To not protect a country like that is like walking around with $50,000 in your pocket, wearing a t-shirt that says "I have $50K in my pocket". That might be cute at 3:00 pm in the mall, but at 1:00 am you wouldn't walk through Compton like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 16, 2019 Author Report Share Posted August 16, 2019 18 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: You make sense based on your limited understanding of the world. If you had a conversation with a 4 year old you'd get the same answers. It's cute, it just doesn't work in real life. "Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it." So you are giving me the same answers as a 4 year old? Noted. 18 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: FWIW, you're the one who brought up the subject of making room in the budget for military spending vs healthcare. So have other candidates. But you went off on theoretical tangents regarding China. 18 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: And yes GH, I make sense, I'm just saying things that you don't understand, or things that you don't want to admit are true. No, what you put forth has been hard to actually read. 18 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: *edited out gibberish nonsense* Surely you must understand then, that opting to not have an army is like allowing yourself to eventually be at the mercy of your enemies? Well the USA has made a lot of enemies. For many reasons. The USA brings these problems on itself. (Failed war on terror) 18 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: The US is a wealthy country with a lot of natural resources and beautiful places to live. To not protect a country like that is like walking around with $50,000 in your pocket, wearing a t-shirt that says "I have $50K in my pocket". That might be cute at 3:00 pm in the mall, but at 1:00 am you wouldn't walk through Compton like that. What's wrong with Compton? I thought you said America was beautiful? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSS- Posted August 21, 2019 Report Share Posted August 21, 2019 Is there going to be any serious primaries within the Republicans against Trump? Usually even incumbent Presidents have had to face some village-idiots challenging them in primaries but unlike in 1980 when Ted Kennedy challenged Carter there has never been any serious threat to an incumbent President from his own party. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 21, 2019 Report Share Posted August 21, 2019 4 hours ago, -TSS- said: Is there going to be any serious primaries within the Republicans against Trump? Usually even incumbent Presidents have had to face some village-idiots challenging them in primaries but unlike in 1980 when Ted Kennedy challenged Carter there has never been any serious threat to an incumbent President from his own party. No...in a short answer. Trump is Caesar...for now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egghead Posted August 27, 2019 Report Share Posted August 27, 2019 She is in a deep blue state, but will she survive this if this is truth? Quote Ilhan Omar had a torrid affair with my husband claims estranged wife of political aide whose firm got more than $250,000 from the radical Democrat, bombshell divorce papers reveal Ilhan Omar, 37, is accused of having an affair with aide Tim Mynett by his now estranged wife Dr. Beth Jordan Mynett DailyMail.com revealed earlier this month that Mynett, 38, had been seen getting up close and personal with Omar He was seen dining and holding hands with her at a secluded Italian restaurant in Playa Del Rey, California in March Now Beth Jordan Mynett, 55, says in divorce documents that he told her in April that he and Omar were 'romantically involved' and he was 'in love' with her DailyMail.com revealed in July that Omar had split with her husband Ahmed Hirsi, the father of her three children, although the date of the split is unknown Mynett is a campaign fundraising expert, having previously worked for Minnesota congressman Keith Ellison as his national finance director Omar took over Ellison's congressional seat when he ran for Attorney General Omar's campaign paid Mynett's company - E Street Group - more than $250K in consulting fees and travel expenses in a year https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7399825/Ilhan-Omars-married-aide-affair-Democratic-congresswoman-told-wife-LOVED-her.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSS- Posted August 27, 2019 Report Share Posted August 27, 2019 Trump is certainly beatable, of course he is, but not by any of the lunatics the Democrats are putting forward. No chance! What has happened to the Democrats? When did they become insane? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 27, 2019 Report Share Posted August 27, 2019 (edited) 38 minutes ago, -TSS- said: Trump is certainly beatable, of course he is, but not by any of the lunatics the Democrats are putting forward. No chance! What has happened to the Democrats? When did they become insane? Things go in cycles, and they come around again, so the populist GOP right now is like the Return to Normalcy GOP of the 1920's While the Democrat Trump Derangement Syndrome is Nixonian, so they are back to being the screeching hippie Democrats of the George McGovern variety from 1968 to 1972. Barack Obama was a professorial Woodrow Wilson, so that caused the Republicans to react with a Warren G. Harding. The Democrats don't see him as Harding, all they see is Nixon 2.0, so they are recoiling to McGovernism. America is a religion, the same themes and associated archetypes go round and round like gospels from a bible. And always there is the Archangels, Jeffersonian v. Jacksonian. Jefferson is the tempered angel, he is all about process. Jackson is the fierce angel, the ends justify the means. In one talon, the Eagle holds the olive branch, in the other, the thunderbolts grasped. Edited August 28, 2019 by Dougie93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 56 minutes ago, -TSS- said: Trump is certainly beatable, of course he is, but not by any of the lunatics the Democrats are putting forward. No chance! You have an old dude, a less old professor, and a wacky Vermont guy. Not really lunatics... the craziest candidate already ran and lost at the primary level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, Dougie93 said: Things go in cycles, and they come around again, so the populist GOP right now is like the Return to Normalcy GOP of the 1920's While the Democrat Trump Derangement Syndrome is Nixonian, so they are back to being the screeching hippie Democrats of the George McGovern variety from 1968 to 1972. Barack Obama was a professorial Woodrow Wilson, so that caused the Republicans to react with a Warren G. Harding. The Democrats don't see him as Harding, all they see is Nixon 2.0, so they are recoiling to McGovernism. America is a religion, the same themes and associated archetypes go round and round like gospels from a bible. And always there is the Archangels, Jeffersonian v. Jacksonian. Jefferson is the tempered angel, he is all about process. Jackson is the fierce angel, the ends justify the means. In one talon, the Eagle holds the olive branch, in the other, the thunderbolts grasped. Harding vs. McGovern is a one sided beatdown. Democrats are out to hang themselves, and the more you try to talk sense into them, the crazier and more fanatical they get. Donald Harding vs Joe, Elizabeth or Bernie McGovern, none of them stand a chance. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 27 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Democrats are out to hang themselves, and the more you try to talk sense into them, the crazier and more fanatical they get. Convinced that their defeat was either a fluke and/or "Russia Collusion", there's no need to adjust, they're charging in the with the same game plan all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: Convinced that their defeat was either a fluke and/or "Russia Collusion", there's no need to adjust, they're charging in the with the same game plan all over again. They think because they won back the House in 2018, that the 2018 strategy will work in a presidential election, despite the fact that mid-term results don't mean much when it comes to presidential elections, just ask Obama. Obama voters stayed home during the mid-terms but came out to vote for him in the presidential elections, same goes for Trump voters, but wishful thinking is helluva drug, and the Democrats are addicted to it. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) Honestly, would have been better for the Democrats if they didn't take back the house, so they couldn't delude themselves into thinking that running on a platform of Orange Man Bad is somehow an effective strategy. But minor irrelevant success against Trump has lead them to double down on fail in 2020, and it's hilarious to watch. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 14 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: They think because they won back the House in 2018, that the 2018 strategy will work in a presidential election, despite the fact that mid-term results don't mean much when it comes to presidential elections, just ask Obama. Obama voters stayed home during the mid-terms but came out to vote for him in the presidential elections, same goes for Trump voters, but wishful thinking is helluva drug, and the Democrats are addicted to it. Meanwhile they seem oblivious to the long term strategic consequences of losing the SCOTUS, with RBG on the edge of the grave. Trump Derangement Syndrome is irrelevant, 6-3 is the doom of their agenda for generations to come, this is for all the marbles, yet they are too hysterical to divided to be coherent in the face of catastrophe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: Meanwhile they seem oblivious to the long term strategic consequences of losing the SCOTUS, with RBG on the edge of the grave. Trump Derangement Syndrome is irrelevant, 6-3 is the doom of their agenda for generations to come, this is for all the marbles, yet they are too hysterical to divided to be coherent in the face of catastrophe. Of all the times to be triggered into committing political suicide, they picked one of the worst times possible times to do it. They desperately need to win in 2020 to stave off a 6-3 SCOTUS, and yet it's hard to imagine them being less prepared to pull that off, they are making a catastrophic mistake that they will pay for, for decades to come. All because they are so easily trolled by the Bad Orange Man, pathetic. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said: Of all the times to be triggered into committing political suicide, they picked one of the worst times possible times to do it. They desperately need to win in 2020 to stave off a 6-3 SCOTUS, and yet it's hard to imagine them being less prepared to pull that off, they are making a catastrophic mistake that they will pay for, for decades to come. All because they are so easily trolled by the Bad Orange Man, pathetic. Literally, the long reign of the New Dealers will come to an end, at the hands of a grifter. Wasn't Napoleon, wasn't Caesar, Bad Orange Man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: Literally, the long reign of the New Dealers will come to an end, at the hands of a grifter. Wasn't Napoleon, wasn't Caesar, Bad Orange Man. Troll President smashes the New Dealers, then follows up with the coffin nails, so amusing. Triggering the opposition into unjustified outrage FTW. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Troll President smashes the New Dealers, then follows up with the coffin nails, so amusing. Indeed. Ah well, couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. BTW; Mindhunter season two on Netflix, binge watching right now, even better than season one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 Just now, Dougie93 said: Indeed. Ah well, couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. BTW; Mindhunter season two on Netflix, binge watching right now, even better than season one. Mindhunter with more than one good season, that's good to hear, one season wonderitis avoided, always a good sign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Mindhunter with more than one good season, that's good to hear, one season wonderitis avoided, always a good sign. Fincher directs the first three episodes, sets the standard again, cine-tv at its best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: Fincher directs the first three episodes, sets the standard again, cine-tv at its best. Excellent. New Breaking Bad sequel movie in the works, you see the trailer? Skinny Pete is back, without the beanie, lulz. Edited August 28, 2019 by Yzermandius19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said: Excellent. New Breaking Bad sequel movie in the works, you see the trailer? Skinny Pete is back, without the beanie, lulz. They do such a good job of recreating the 70's, like how I remember it, it contrasts with this age now, Bad Orange Man couldn't have pulled it off back then, Bad Orange Man is so postmodern, the essence of. Edited August 28, 2019 by Dougie93 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted August 28, 2019 Report Share Posted August 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: They do such a good job of recreating the 70's, like how I remember it, it contrasts with this age now, Bad Orange Man couldn't have pulled it off back then, Bad Orange Man is so postmodern, the essence of. Reality TV President, as postmodern as it gets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.