What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

French Rage said:
Have we discussed the "I've always wanted to receive a purple heart" thing yet? What the **** does that even mean?
Click to expand...

Vet callers on talk radio shows have really been going off on that. It's interesting because on all the misogyny and racism and Muslim fearmongering they were giving him a pass and saying "people are too PC," but the double whammy of Khan and the purple heart was too much for them.

Where I work, the overlap between Trump supporters and veterans is noteworthy, so if this is real it could actually hurt him where he lives. Calling Mexicans rapists wasn't ever going to dig into Trump's prime demo, but this could be deep hurting.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

Trump probably doesn't even know why a Purple Heart is awarded. To him its probably just another shiny medal to peacock around in.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

As President would I ever use nukes?
Dang right ... in response, response, to an attack against the US with a WMD.

Unfortunately, I don't see Trump seeing that very fine but very significant criteria.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
As President would I ever use nukes?
Dang right ... in response, response, to an attack against the US with a WMD.
Click to expand...

As President I would never use nukes under any circumstances -- even in response to a nuclear attack by a state actor*. But I would not advertise the fact.

(* at the point at which nukes are being exchanged, states, regimes, governments and economic/political systems no longer have any importance. At that point we are looking at the continued existence of life in the only environment it has ever been observed to occupy. The priority becomes: survival of maximum number of human beings. The timeframe for eventually righting wrongs jumps to centuries. )
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
As President would I ever use nukes?
Dang right ... in response, response, to an attack against the US with a WMD.

Unfortunately, I don't see Trump seeing that very fine but very significant criteria.
Click to expand...

He's thinking of all the attention he would get with his finger on the button. The ultimate rush for him.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

Kepler said:
As President I would never use nukes under any circumstances -- even in response to a nuclear attack by a state actor. But I would not advertise the fact.
Click to expand...

Alternatively, I'd let it be well known: WMD me? WMD you. Except my math includes a minimum 10x response factor. ;)
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
Alternatively, I'd let it be well known: WMD me? WMD you. Except my math includes a minimum 10x response factor. ;)
Click to expand...

I'd let it be known: WMD me? All American conventional force will now be brought to bear until you and your entire military structure are deposed and dead or standing trial at the Hague.

Give them 24 hours and their own military will do the job for us.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

Kepler said:
I'd let it be known: WMD me? All American conventional force will now be brought to bear until you and your entire military structure are deposed and dead or standing trial at the Hague.

Give them 24 hours and their own military will do the job for us.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, while you're saying that, they're dropping the second, etc., etc., WMD.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
Will this mess:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sent-cash-to-iran-as-americans-were-freed-1470181874

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...ash_payment_to_iran_why_is_that_relevant.html

(a) Do harm beyond the Obama Adminstration, i.e. the Administration's preferred candidate?
(b) Be useful at all to Hillary?
(c) Not be completely screwed up as an opportunity for Trump by Trump?
Click to expand...

(a) No, why would it?
(b) Useful? Not sure how it could be.
(c) Are you kidding? It's not whether but when. He might even turn it into a net loss, somehow.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
Unfortunately, while you're saying that, they're dropping the second, etc., etc., WMD.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that if this is the assumption then you should have nuked them before any attack, just because they had nukes in the first place, to avoid the first attack.

There is a flaw in my strategy, though. Let's say country A has one nuke and uses it on Biloxi because have you been there? By not retaliating country B with 1000 nukes might decide "might as well hit New York."

But at the end of the day, if I'm president and Putin sends 1000 nukes to wipe out North America, I have to take the hit. The 1000 nuke retaliation won't bring back North America and might end all life on the planet.

Countries and philosophies are small potatoes compared to the species. Literally anything is preferable to throwing the off switch.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XVI: KICK THE BABY!

The Sicatoka said:
How about, "A Hilary Clinton Adminstration will never trade, nor give even the remote appearance of a trade, of money for hostages."
Click to expand...

But both parties would say that so it would be a wash at best. And it wouldn't be a wash, because I would think there must be some sort of Kevin Bacon connections between Hillary and the people at DOS who negotiated the Iran deal (WSJ has to think it to, or they wouldn't be flacking it so hard.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top