Our New President - President Donald Trump

Post Reply New Topic

so, the most help is going to the folks who need it least. typical trump.

So, people in the upper bracket are still taxed at more than *twice* the rate of people in the lower bracket.

as they should be. their taxes aren't coming out of their food money.

No. The poor pay a much higher percentage of their income in property taxes and sales taxes. We don't actually have a progressive tax code in the US.

good point

Someone just had to roll Einstein over in his grave.

This is the domain of the international atomic energy agency, not Twitter. Personal feelings are also quite irrelevant in the event of nuclear conflict so perhaps in some nihilistic way that might be what's reconciling you with millions of lives being gambled over one online prep-schoolboy brawl.

Nuclear weapons should not be in the hands of anyone who makes decisions via personal impulses. Mutually assured destruction is the obvious problem with your reasoning. You probably don't want to die by nuke either, so I don't really think that makes you a pushover.

I'm not really sure why I'm dignifying this with a response because it's clear you're not seeing the difference between high school melodrama & thermonuclear war. If you're in the habit of insulting strangers, that's ethically beneath even the feigned respect of this administration.

Sinking to the level of wanting someone dead is the real p**** move here. Nothing strikes me as weaker than failure to coexist.

By your logic no one should be in control of nukes. Every single human makes decisions via personal impulses. That’s what being human is. The world nuclear powers decided only they should have nukes and that nukes should be limited to reduce their chance of being used. If every nation and their brother has nukes it’s fsr more likely nukes will get used. North Korea or Iran are far far far far more. Likely to use nukes then say Russia or the USA. North Korea and Iran don’t care or think about MAD. They don’t care about human lives, heck both say the holocaust didn’t happen, both are fine with killing thousands or millions of their own people. Why would they care about nuking their enemies? The un said North Korea can’t have nukes, North Korea is in the un. So no they can’t have nukes and violating said agreement means war. If we don’t enforce said agreements then we are weak pushovers who will one day get what’s coming. People attack weak people. Every nation or empire that became or showed weakness got destroyed. It’s just how horrible we humans are, in the idea world you dream of no one would want nukes. Kim doesn’t want nukes for Peace. No one wants North Korea, no one. North Korea is under no threat of attack that they don’t bring on themselves. If they just shut up, stand down their military, sign the peac treaty agreeing to reality of two separate Korea’s, all in the are would be well and there’d be a ever lasting peace. But Kim like his dad and grandad are power Hungary lunatics who want war and ultimate power. They love killing people they take joy in it. You want such a person to have a weapon that can kill millions or hundreds of millions ina second?

Kim and North Korea don’t want to coexist. If they did they’d sign the freaking treaty and End the Korea war, open borders and join the rest of the world In 2017 Instead of holding on to 1950

Kim Jong Un probably doesn't see much hope for having a safe retirement if he dissolves North Korea. He may not have studied how people can successfully unwind monarchies. In any case, he doesn't seem to be moving in the direction of building the foundations for a dynamic civil society.

Kim has certainly seen the video of Qaddafi's death, and doesn't want that to happen to him. Assad's still in power; Qaddafi and Saddam Hussein are not. Saddam's fate, while preferable, still leaves much to be desired. He will do what he thinks he needs to do to avoid either.

Sadly, I don't think peace is an option in his mind. However, that doesn't make war the only option.

We have some idea of the costs of war. We don't know if sanctions will make the regime reconsider. Realistically, if he'd keep his murdering and international crime and threats at a dull roar, people would leave him alone.

the thought among diplomatic experts is that if we reassured kim that we're not seeking regime change, he'd calm the eff down.

I doubt that. You think if people stopped mentioning impeachment Trump would calm down?

Truth is there is no 'good' solution to N.Korea. A break in the armistice brings an estimated 2 - 10 million dead civilians (that high one is Steve Bannon's number) plus a refugee crisis in both South Korea/China, and appeasement has led to were we are now with N.Korea nuclear armed and long range ballistic missile capable. The only good news is that we are still in a M.A.D. situation which makes the likeliness of nuclear deployment close to 0, and the nukes are used as a negotiating strategy as opposed to a realistic military outcome.

did you read all of the posts above about kim trying to avoid gadaffi's fate, for example?

How exactly could we reassure him? The only people he has to negotiate with are the ones that in his eyes are responsible for Qadaffi's fate.

vexillologically (?) speaking, the US flag isn't that great.

i wonder if any of the flag burners out there have no political statement, and instead are simply disgusted at the design itself.

Nope.....I don't think "bad design" is s factor in flag-burning.

Yes I did, but the N.Korea regime is nothing like Iraq or Libya, mainly because those two were truly rogue states with no backers, N. Korea has China's backing, making regime change highly unlikely. Just because a smaller nation wants WMD's does not make them the same as all other small nations that want the same, there are nuances to each that make them unique situations.

Point 1: the last thing China wants is a few million refugees flooding it's borders. Propping up a petty dictatorship to keep s**t to shoe level is the most cost effective way of dealing with the situation. They aren't super high on N. Korea either, but they need the regime in place to prevent chaos in their Liaoning and Jilin provinces as well as providing a buffer in the same regions to S. Korea. Any move we make on N. Korea, China sees as a move against them since N. Korea is their proxy state, meaning any lasting diplomatic solution needs China's backing.

Point 2: Korea has been an active war for 64 years, there was no conclusion or peace treaty, both Koreas are operating under an armistice. It's very hard to convince an enemy you don't want regime change when it's still a war zone.

Point 3: N. Korea has never followed through on any type of diplomacy. No matter the deal, the N. Koreans have taken the benefits of the deal and refused to follow through on their end of it. They are inherently untrustworthy. The last three administrations have given them the benefit of the doubt and each was stabbed in the back. It would be foolish to think they won't do the same again if soft diplomacy if employed. We absolutely need to stop repeating that mistake.

http://www.twitter.com/keithboykin/status/914133978038374400?s=09